Improving Error Handling for Automation Engineers
Client: [Confidential – Automation Software Vendor]
Role: UX Lead
Focus: Error Pane & Troubleshooting UI
Timeline: 3 months (one Pi - product increment)
Challenge
Maintenance and automation engineers rely on robust error handling systems to manage constant alerts and failures. The legacy system lacked clarity, prioritization, and contextual feedback.
I was responsible for redesigning the Error Pane within the software. The goal was to reduce cognitive load, improve issue traceability, and enhance decision-making under pressure.
Research & Definition
Baseline: I reviewed prior usability studies and legacy product data (Studio 5000).
Findings:
- Errors were difficult to locate within the visual canvas
- Engineers had to cross-reference multiple sources to resolve issues
- No direct way to access detailed error context or history
Design Objectives
- Enable direct navigation to errors in the canvas
- Provide quick-glance detail through tooltips
- Improve clarity and reduce clutter in error lists
Ideation & Prototyping
Explored solutions via low- and high-fidelity wireframes:
- Tooltip variants with minimal footprint
- Dynamic error list with status tagging
- “Jump to Error” pattern directly linked to canvas view
User Testing
Consent Manager Dashboard
Participants: 8 process engineers
Method: Clickable prototype sessions
Key Insights:
Tooltips improved comprehension but needed better trigger logic
“Jump to Error” flow was intuitive and praised
Tooltip size raised concerns in data-dense views
Additionally, I ran a PURE (Pragmatic Usability Rating by Experts) session to uncover deeper UI pain points across the platform.
Results
Feature | Status | Notes |
Jump to error location | Implemented in Release 1 | Positive user feedback |
Tooltip system | Deferred to Release 2 | Resource constraints |
Accessibility & search | In scope | Discovered during testing |
Reflection
This project reinforced the value of small UX wins with high technical feasibility. Tooltips and direct navigation, while simple in concept, required close coordination with devs due to layering and trigger logic.
Working with real engineers helped keep the design grounded in reality—and the PURE framework revealed nuanced accessibility gaps early in the process.