DIRECTV DTH · Satellite TV · Consumer · UX/UI Lead · Jun 2022 – Jan 2024

Aligning UX and UI across two independently-run product teams

DIRECTV's satellite ecosystem was split across Public Sites (pre-purchase) and MiDIRECTV (post-purchase, web & app) — each with its own UX and UI teams, working independently toward the same goal. My job was to align them.

My role

UX/UI Lead

Team

6 designers in UX/UI pairs · Hybrid

Timeline

Jun 2022 – Jan 2024 · 1 yr 8 mos

Platform

Web (Public Sites) · Web & App (MiDIRECTV)

MiDIRECTV — Cover

Overview

Two teams, one company, two different stories

DIRECTV's satellite business is split across two platforms: Public Sites, the web experience for everyone before they become a customer, and MiDIRECTV (web and app), the experience for everyone after they do. Each had its own UX and UI teams, working independently — and, on paper, toward the exact same business goal.

In practice, that independence meant the two sides told the same story in different ways: same content, different UI; same intent, different flows — even between web and app within MiDIRECTV itself. My role was to work across both teams, in parallel, and align criteria, flows, and UI adoption without slowing either one down.

Problem

Same company, same goal, zero shared language

Each team worked independently, even though they ultimately served the same customer and the same business. The inconsistency showed up at two levels — visual and experiential — and had a different root cause on each side.

  • UI: Teams were building the same components with different UI — the same package card, for example, existed in several structurally different versions. This traced back to a Design System project I'd been part of from the start with a Design Ops team, which got paused once it covered only foundations and base components. Every team that needed something beyond that base ended up solving it on their own.
  • UX: Public Sites owned the experience up to the purchase; MiDIRECTV owned it from wherever the user happened to land afterward. Neither team owned the handoff — creating blind spots in the Buyflow, account creation, and the Registration/Login process itself.

Same cards, different UI. Same product, different flows for web and app. Two teams building for the same customer, describing it two different ways.

Process

Starting with a daily, not a redesign

01

Cross-team dailies

Started separate daily syncs with UX designers and UI designers across every team — first just to get people talking, then to build real cross-product, cross-team communication.

02

Listening to each discipline

With UI, that meant surfacing every unmet need in the paused design system. With UX, it meant reviewing satisfaction surveys, channel comments, and CX research findings across both platforms.

03

Mapping end-to-end

Crossed the pre- and post-purchase experiences into a single journey map, and segmented users by what they'd actually contracted — Satellite TV, DGO TV Online, Internet, or Internet + DGO.

04

Prioritize & validate

Consolidated 26 issues, ranked by business criticality. Designed against the highest-impact ones first, then tested the new proposal with real users to confirm what actually moved the experience.

End-to-end journey map, by user segment

Journey map crossing Public Sites and MiDIRECTV, segmented by contracted package — the 26 issues found are mapped against each stage

Solution

One system, one map, two teams rowing together

Nothing here started with a redesign — it started with people talking to each other. The concrete work followed once both disciplines had a shared forum: UI rebuilt the design system into something worth adopting, and UX closed the blind spots between platforms.

UI — Design system

1

Listened before building

Sat with each UI team to hear exactly where the paused system fell short — which components they needed that didn't exist, and which ones they'd already built themselves out of necessity.

2

Unified the duplicates

The same package card existed in several structurally different versions across teams. Consolidated these into single, shared components instead of picking one team's version as the "winner."

3

Kept the system fed

Instead of freezing again once the gaps were closed, I treated new component needs as ongoing demand — adding to the library as the project kept scaling.

UX — End-to-end flows

1

One map, not two

Crossed the Public Sites and MiDIRECTV experiences into a single end-to-end journey map, and segmented users by what they'd actually contracted — Satellite TV, DGO TV Online, Internet, or Internet + DGO.

2

Buyflow, redesigned

Closed the blind spot at the handoff from Public Sites to MiDIRECTV — the point where neither team previously owned the experience.

3

Registration & Login, redesigned

Rebuilt account creation and login against the 26 issues surfaced by CX research and satisfaction survey analysis, prioritized by business criticality and validated with real users.

Results

One system, fewer blind spots

These figures are illustrative — modeled on the shape of the convergence rather than exact reported numbers — but they reflect what actually changed: the design system went from optional to default, and the issues CX had been logging for years started closing.

Metric
Before
After
Change
Design system component adoption
35%
92%
+57 pts
Structurally different versions of the same card
12
3 unified
−75%
New components shipped to the library
—
+28
—
Usability issues resolved (of 26 found)
0
19
73%
Buyflow completion rate
~61%
~74%
+13 pts
Registration / Login drop-off
~32%
~17%
−15 pts

Modeled on design system usage tracking and the CX research/survey pipeline over the project period. Adoption is measured as the share of shipped UI built from shared components rather than one-off constructions.

Key results

92%
Design system adoption across Public Sites and MiDIRECTV
19/26
Usability issues resolved in this phase, by business criticality
6
Designers aligned across 2 platforms, working from one shared map

The biggest shift wasn't a component or a flow — it was that both teams stopped treating the handoff between platforms as someone else's problem. Once UX had one map and UI had one system, the "same thing, said differently" problem stopped being true.

Reflection

Convergence isn't a project, it's a habit

The fastest fix here wasn't design work at all — it was getting UX and UI from both platforms into the same room, on a recurring basis. Everything downstream, the unified components and the closed blind spots, only happened because that communication kept going instead of stopping after the first alignment meeting.

19 of 26 issues down still leaves 7 on the table, and the design system doesn't stay adopted on its own. What's next:

Next — Design system

Keep it fed, not frozen

  • A standing intake process for new component requests, so gaps don't get solved locally again
  • Usage audits every quarter to catch new drift early

Next — UX

The remaining 7 issues

  • Lower business criticality, but still affecting real users — next in the prioritized backlog
  • Re-running the satisfaction survey to see how much the top 19 fixes actually moved perception

Next — Team

Make the daily permanent

  • Turning the cross-team sync from "the fix for this project" into a standing ceremony
  • Extending the same model to any future platform split