SimplerQMS

QMS Platform

Rebuilding Document Control for life science compliance

From a UI problem to a platform pattern: what rebuilding Document Control made possible

Industry

Life sciences

Function

Compliance

Role

Founding Product Designer · End-to-end

Year

2025

Document control page

Overview / Brief

A simple UI problem, or so we thought

Document control sounds like a filing problem. It isn't. In a regulated life sciences company, a document going through the wrong workflow, or being edited when it shouldn't be, is a compliance risk. Version numbers aren't administrative detail. They're audit trail.

The brief was to redesign Document Control: make the workflow clearer, fix the status indicators, sort out the confusion around versioning.

On the surface, a UI problem.

Document Control before & after

The problem underneath the problem

Going deep at the root case

The most critical problem area was workflow guidance. Users didn't understand what state their document was in, what actions were available, or why certain things were blocked. The instinct would have been to clean up the labels and clarify the UI. I didn't think that would hold.

Through mapping sessions with the CTO, PM, and CEO, I kept running into the same root issue: the system was treating Draft and Effective documents as the same object at different points in a timeline. But they're not the same thing at all.

Working copy

This is a document in motion. It gets edited, sent for review, returned, revised, approved. The available actions change at every stage.

Effective copy

The document is locked and acts as the authoritative version until it needs updating, to which it circles back to a Draft.

Working copy

This is a document in motion. It gets edited, sent for review, returned, revised, approved. The available actions change at every stage.

Effective copy

The document is locked and acts as the authoritative version until it needs updating, to which it circles back to a Draft.

These two modes have different rules, different available actions, and different user mental models. Modeling them as one continuous object was the source of the confusion. No interface fix would resolve it, because the confusion was architectural.

What we built first

Making the Draft workflow legible

The architectural separation was the right long-term direction, but it couldn't ship in one go. The first implementation focused on what would make the biggest difference immediately: making the Draft workflow legible.

Workflow status indicator

Creating a clearer status indicator showing exactly where a document sat in the workflow (Draft, Review, Review Closed, Approval) and an action bar that surfaced only the relevant next action at each stage.

Workflow Status

Footer: contextual action bar

Layout hierarchy & editing visibility

A sidebar for properties that could be edited without disrupting the document view, which would also act as a clean reading mode for when the document was Effective and locked.

Editable properties panel

Cleaner visual difference between two high level states

The Effective state got a stripped-down view with no workflow UI, because there was nothing to do there. The Working Copy state got structure and clear progression.

Effective Copy - no editing function

Shared model to plan for later

The deeper architectural work was acknowledged and deferred deliberately. The design work gave engineers a shared model to plan against and a clear picture of what the system needed to eventually become.

Outcome

Cleaner UI, and a new architectural direction

In testing, QA managers said they could see at a glance how far along a document was, and who was holding it up. If a document was still in Review and they needed it to move, they could immediately see which reviewer hadn't acted and go directly to that person. That kind of visibility, knowing not just the state but the specific blocker, was what the old model made impossible.

More significantly, surfacing the architectural flaw gave the engineering team something they hadn't had before: a named model for what was wrong and a direction to build toward. That's not a UI outcome. That's a foundation.

For users

Quality managers could orient immediately. Status, ownership, and workflow position visible at a glance, without reading through an undifferentiated list.

For engineering

The layout pattern became the structural template for Change Control. A two-level workflow built on the same foundation, without redesigning from scratch.

For users

Quality managers could orient immediately. Status, ownership, and workflow position visible at a glance, without reading through an undifferentiated list.

For engineering

The layout pattern became the structural template for Change Control. A two-level workflow built on the same foundation, without redesigning from scratch.

Document access modal

Design system colors

Checked out banner

Other Case Studies ↓

Other case studies ↓

Lun

Building a 3D scanning tool for heat loss surveys

Superlist

An integrations framework for a task management tool

Forecast

Mobile time tracking redesign for a project management tool

anhthilam1@gmail.com

Instagram