Xavi Cabrera — UX/UI Lead Designer

The Story

Designing with
Purpose

I started in graphic and visual design, then moved into web and product design as I realized how powerful well-designed digital experiences can be for both users and businesses.

At Credomatic, I worked on complex, regulated systems for everyday banking — learning to balance usability, risk, and compliance. At Grupo Nación, I focused on large-scale, content-driven products that needed to drive engagement across multiple channels.

As a freelancer, I've partnered with Coca-Cola, Huawei, and Verizon — giving me deep understanding of designing at scale, collaborating with distributed teams, and aligning design with global brand guidelines.

Today, as Lead Designer at Nearsure, I lead end-to-end product design efforts: from discovery and research, to interaction design, design systems, and final delivery.

Worked with

Nearsure Credomatic Grupo Nación Coca-Cola Huawei Verizon

Now

Nearsure

Lead Designer

End-to-end product design, design systems, cross-functional leadership

2019

Freelance

Senior Product Designer

Global brands — Coca-Cola, Huawei, Verizon

2016

Grupo Nación

UX/UI Designer

Multi-channel content-driven products

2014

Credomatic

Product Designer

Banking systems, regulated UX, compliance design

Design Process

How I Turn
Ambiguity
Into Clarity

My process isn't a template — it's a system forged in genuinely hard environments: emergency dispatch software where UX errors cost lives, telecom navigation at enterprise scale, and sports platforms with seasonal churn patterns. Every phase is intentional. Every decision is traceable.

"I don't design interfaces. I design decision architectures — systems where the right action is obvious, the wrong action is hard to take, and the user never has to think about which is which."

— Xavi Cabrera · Senior Product Designer

End-to-End Design Framework — How every project flows

🔍

01 Discover

Stakeholder mapping, research synthesis, problem framing before any solution thinking.

→ Stakeholder interviews

→ Heuristic audits

→ Competitive benchmarking

→ Mental model mapping

Real example: PlayOn stakeholder mindmaps (Martin/Derek/Jack) surfaced 3 conflicting definitions of "success" — fixed before any design work started

🗺️

02 Define

Turning research into structural clarity — journey maps, IA taxonomy, service blueprints.

→ Journey mapping

→ Service blueprints

→ IA taxonomy matrices

→ Problem statements

Real example: Verizon Router GUI — 60+ features classified across 11 dimensions in a taxonomy matrix before any wireframe was drawn

⚡

03 Ideate

Structured exploration — not brainstorming. Every concept traceable to a specific user or business need.

→ Design sprints

→ Concept exploration

→ Facilitated workshops

→ Iteration frameworks

Real example: Traumasoft Daily Worksheet went through 3 full versions before approval — each iteration directly addressed documented usability failures from the previous

🔧

04 Build

High-fidelity design with system thinking — every component tied to a design system token.

→ Design system work

→ High-fidelity mocks

→ Prototype flows

→ Dev handoff specs

Real example: Traumasoft — one unified design system governing both Scheduling and CAD modules. Zero relearning cost when switching contexts.

📊

05 Validate

Closing the feedback loop — testing, measuring, and documenting what to carry forward.

→ Usability testing

→ A/B test setup

→ Stakeholder review

→ Learnings documentation

Real example: PlayOn personalization vs. completion rate — documented as an explicit A/B test spec when data within timeline was insufficient to decide

What separates Senior from Junior — my design principles in practice

🏗️

Service before screen

I map the full service — frontstage and backstage — before designing any single screen. A feature that looks good but breaks the operational backend isn't a feature; it's a liability. At Museo JADE, the service blueprint revealed three proposed features that assumed operational capacity the institution didn't have — preventing three post-launch redesigns.

📐

Frameworks over opinions

I build classification frameworks before making placement decisions. At Verizon, the taxonomy matrix (11 dimensions × 60+ items) eliminated subjective placement debates entirely. When every feature has an objective profile, navigation decisions become near-mechanical. The framework is the work — not a preliminary to it.

📸

Visual evidence over verbal argument

When a PM proposed a navigation structure with no research basis, I didn't argue. I built the "Current vs. New" visual mapping with colored lines showing exactly what changed and why. The data argued for us. In enterprise environments, the designer who translates reasoning into visible evidence wins the room — every time.

⚖️

Knowing when not to decide

On PlayOn, the personalization vs. onboarding completion rate tradeoff had no right answer within our timeline. A junior designer forces a recommendation. I documented the question, specified the A/B test that would answer it, and handed it off. Stakeholders trusted it more because I showed my reasoning — not despite the ambiguity, but because of how I handled it.

🎯

Exceptions surface, not hide

In Traumasoft's CAD module, there was no visual warning for incomplete crews. "People just have to know to look for it." I designed the Exceptions Panel — making every anomaly impossible to miss with severity classification, intelligent suggestions, and direct action buttons. The most dangerous UX gap in safety-critical software isn't poor usability. It's invisibility.

🔀

Phased recommendations prevent paralysis

At Verizon, the long-term navigation direction required a platform migration. Presenting only that would have stalled everything. I split recommendations into two explicit tracks: implementable now vs. migration-dependent. Both advanced simultaneously. This isn't compromise — it's strategic sequencing. Scope discipline is a design skill, not a PM skill.

Anatomy of a design decision — how I think through hard calls

CASE: TRAUMASOFT

Native Dispatch Grid vs. Iframe Embed — the call that defined the product

THE TENSION

Engineering wanted to embed the CAD grid as an iframe to reduce dev time. Product wanted a fully custom native component. Both were valid. The decision would define 3 years of product architecture.

MY ANALYSIS

Iframe = faster now, impossible to iterate later. Every future enhancement (status filters, exceptions panel, right-click menu redesign) would require engineering workarounds. The short-term saving would compound into long-term debt. I documented this as a 3-year cost projection, not a preference.

THE OUTCOME

Native component approved. 18 months later, the Exceptions Panel, right-click redesign, and status filter bar were all shipped in the same sprint — features that would have each required a full engineering cycle on the iframe approach. The architectural decision compounded positively.

3×

Average iterations before final approval — never shipping first concepts

100%

Decisions documented with explicit rationale traceable to user research

Features designed without a corresponding user or business need identified first

Industries: telecom, healthcare, sports media, cultural institutions, enterprise SaaS

Designing with
Purpose

What I
Do Best

How I Turn
Ambiguity
Into Clarity

Case
Studies

Let's build
something
great.

Designing withPurpose

What IDo Best

How I TurnAmbiguityInto Clarity

CaseStudies

Let's buildsomethinggreat.

Designing with
Purpose

What I
Do Best

How I Turn
Ambiguity
Into Clarity

Case
Studies

Let's build
something
great.