Product design is the work that happens between 'we know what we want to build' and 'here is the specification that development can execute against.' It covers information architecture, user flows, wireframes, interaction design, and high-fidelity UI -- the structured decisions that determine whether the product works for the people who will use it. RaftLabs product design covers the full design process from initial discovery through development handoff: research to validate assumptions, information architecture to define the structure, wireframes to validate flows before visual design begins, high-fidelity Figma designs, and a component specification that eliminates ambiguity in development. Scoped as a standalone design engagement or as the design phase of a combined design-and-development project.
Recent outcomes
Voice AI · Research
Text-based interviews converted to automated phone calls
6× deeper insightsAI Automation · Ops
Manual invoice OCR across 40+ gas stations
20k+ txns day oneLoyalty · Retail
SuperValu & Centra loyalty platform with receipt validation
1,062 users in 4 weeksSaaS · Logistics
Multi-carrier shipping hub for Indonesian eCommerce
2,000+ shipments yr 1RaftLabs delivers end-to-end product design for SaaS products, web applications, internal tools, and mobile apps. Each engagement covers user research to validate assumptions, information architecture, wireframes validated before visual design begins, high-fidelity Figma UI, interaction design, and a development handoff with annotated component specifications. Most projects deliver in 6 to 12 weeks at a fixed cost.
Trusted by
Product design is the discipline that determines whether software built to specification actually works for the people using it. Most products have a business requirements document and an engineering spec. Fewer have a structured design process that validates the information architecture, tests the user flows before visual design begins, and produces a handoff that gives development everything needed to build correctly. The gap between "we have designs" and "we have designs that were validated before engineering started" is where most product rework originates.
The design process matters as much as the design output. Starting with high-fidelity visuals before the structure is validated produces good-looking wireframes that may not survive contact with real users. Starting with information architecture and low-fidelity wireframes, validating them with representative users, and only then moving to visual design produces a product where the structure has been tested before a significant design investment has been made in it. That sequence reduces redesign risk -- which is the most expensive kind of rework in software development.
Capabilities
Structured discovery before any design output begins: stakeholder interviews to map business requirements, success metrics, technical constraints, and the internal disagreements about what the product should do that would otherwise surface as design revision cycles. User research to understand how target users currently solve the problem -- 5 to 8 user interviews with a prepared discussion guide using Jobs-to-be-Done (JTBD) framing: what job the user is hiring the product to do, what they use now, and what triggers the decision to switch. Assumption mapping using an impact/certainty matrix identifies which design decisions carry the most risk: high-impact, low-certainty assumptions are tested first; low-impact, high-certainty assumptions proceed to design without research. Competitive analysis documents how the 3 to 5 closest competitors handle the same user flow -- identifying conventions users already know (design leverage) and gaps in the market (differentiation opportunities). Affinity mapping groups raw interview findings into themes; research synthesis produces a documented findings report with direct user quotes and a set of design principles that guide decisions throughout the engagement.
The structural decisions that determine whether users can navigate the product without a tutorial -- site map, navigation hierarchy, menu depth and labelling, content grouping, and search and filter patterns. These decisions are cheap to change at a diagram stage and expensive to change at a built product stage, which is why they're documented and reviewed before wireframes begin. Card sorting sessions (open card sort to discover how users naturally categorise content; closed card sort to validate the proposed category structure against user mental models) produce a navigation structure that reflects how users think about the content, not how the development team organised the data model. Tree testing validates the proposed IA: users attempt to find specific items in the IA hierarchy without visual design cues, and the first-click success rate reveals where the structure fails before any screen is designed. For complex products with search: entity relationship documentation (what can be searched, what can be filtered, what facets make sense for which content types) and the interaction model for filter state management (URL parameters for shareable filtered views, query builder vs. faceted navigation).
Low-fidelity wireframes in Figma for all key user flows: grayscale layouts that establish content hierarchy, element placement, and interaction model without the visual detail that distracts stakeholders into feedback about colours and typography rather than structure and flow. Annotated wireframes document: what each element does, the logic that determines which state the user sees, edge cases the interface must handle (empty state, error state, maximum content, loading), and the questions the wireframe is leaving open for later. Interactive Figma prototypes for usability testing: click-through simulations of the primary user flows that can be tested with users on their own device without requiring a code prototype. Usability testing sessions with 3 to 5 representative users per round using think-aloud protocol: participants narrate their thought process as they attempt tasks, surfacing where the design doesn't match their mental model of what should happen. Task completion rates and first-click accuracy measured per flow. Iteration on wireframes based on testing findings before moving to high-fidelity -- the point of the wireframe phase is to discover and fix structural problems while the cost of change is still a few hours of Figma work rather than a sprint of rework.
Pixel-precise visual design in Figma built on validated wireframes -- which means the structure is already confirmed and visual design time is spent on visual decisions, not structural ones. Design tokens defined as Figma Variables and corresponding CSS custom properties: colour (semantic names like --color-surface-primary rather than --blue-500), typography scale, spacing grid, and border-radius -- so visual changes propagate system-wide rather than requiring screen-by-screen updates. Every component designed with all states required for production implementation: default, hover, focus-visible (keyboard navigation outline), active/pressed, disabled, loading (skeleton and spinner variants), error with accessible error message placement, success, and empty (zero-state with guidance copy). Auto-layout throughout so spacing is numeric and extractable rather than visually estimated. Responsive breakpoints for mobile (375px), tablet (768px), and desktop (1280px+) with explicit layout behaviour at each breakpoint -- not just a scaled-down version of the desktop layout. Dark mode variants using prefers-color-scheme media query where the product requires them. Typography choices informed by readability research: body text at minimum 16px, line height 1.5-1.6, line length 60-75 characters for reading comfort.
Interaction specifications that give development the information needed to implement behaviour correctly -- not just visual states, but the triggers, transitions, and logic that connect them. Animation specifications include: duration (150ms for micro-interactions like button press feedback, 250-300ms for panel reveals and modal entrances, 400ms for page-level transitions), easing curves (ease-out for elements entering the screen -- fast start, slow end; ease-in for elements leaving; ease-in-out for elements moving within the screen), and the specific property being animated (opacity + translateY for toasts; scale + opacity for tooltips; height or max-height for accordions). Figma Smart Animate prototypes demonstrate timing and easing before development begins -- removing interpretation ambiguity. Complex interaction specifications for drag-and-drop (ghost element on drag start, drop target highlight, reorder animation), inline editing (click-to-edit pattern with cancel/save affordances, keyboard shortcuts, focus management), multi-step wizard flows (progress indicator, back/forward navigation, validation gating on step advance), and data tables (column sort, row selection, bulk actions, pagination). Loading skeleton screens specified as components rather than spinners -- shaped to match the content they replace so layout shift is minimised when data loads.
Handoff is the end of the design process, not a file drop followed by weeks of Slack clarifications. Figma file organised for developer inspection: named components with self-documenting layer names, all styles as named Figma Variables (not one-off hex values), auto-layout frames with numeric spacing values rather than visually-placed elements, and a separate "Handoff Notes" page with annotations for every non-obvious interaction, edge case, and responsive behaviour. Design token export maps Figma Variables to CSS custom properties or Tailwind config values: the design token file is generated from Figma, not manually maintained alongside it. Component specification document covers: component API (what props or variants exist, what values are valid), state inventory (all visual states and the conditions that trigger each), and accessibility requirements (ARIA role, keyboard interaction, focus management, screen reader labelling). Walkthrough session with the engineering lead before build begins -- a 60-90 minute screen-share where the designer walks through every key flow and answers implementation questions before they become blocking Slack threads. Design QA review at the end of each sprint: designer reviews implemented screens against the Figma spec and documents discrepancies for the engineering team's next sprint. The review is not a rejection mechanism -- it's the quality gate that catches drift before it accumulates.
Tell us what you're building, who uses it, and what design decisions are currently blocking development. We'll scope the engagement and give you a fixed cost.
UX/UI Design Services -- full design capability overview
UX Audit -- diagnosis of where an existing product is losing users
Design System Development -- component library and design tokens for teams with multiple products
Mobile App Design -- design for iOS, Android, and cross-platform mobile apps
Custom Software Development -- combined design-and-development engagement
MVP Development -- product design as part of the MVP build process
Mobile App Development -- mobile development that follows the design handoff
Frequently asked questions
Design works best as a collaborative process rather than a black-box handoff. The discovery phase involves your product and business stakeholders to capture requirements and constraints. Research findings are shared and discussed before design begins. Wireframes are reviewed at key milestones before the next phase starts. High-fidelity designs are presented with rationale so feedback is informed. The goal is a design process where your team understands the decisions being made, not a design that arrives as a surprise at the end.
Both where needed. Most SaaS products and web applications need responsive designs that work on desktop and tablet, with a considered mobile experience for the parts of the product users access on the go. For products that are primarily mobile (field apps, consumer apps, internal tools for non-desk workers), mobile is the primary design target and desktop is secondary or absent. The platform split is decided during discovery based on where your users actually access the product.
A focused product design engagement -- a single core user flow or a small product with clearly scoped screens -- typically takes 4 to 8 weeks. A more complete engagement covering a full product with research, multiple flows, responsive design, and a design system takes 8 to 16 weeks. Timeline depends on the number of screens, the complexity of the interactions, and how much user research is in scope. We scope the engagement based on the product scope you bring to discovery.
A freelance designer can produce high-quality visual design. The difference is the process: structured user research before design begins, wireframe validation before visual design, design decisions tied to documented rationale, and a development handoff that gives engineering what they need to build accurately. The risk with freelance design is starting at high-fidelity visuals before the structure is validated -- which leads to redesign work when users find the flow confusing. Our process validates the structure first.
Work with us
We scope Product Design Services in 30 minutes. You walk away with a clear cost, timeline, and approach. No commitment required.