“We prototyped to win the room. The workflow we built doing it handed the developers a head start they could feel.”
Who sees what, and when
Seismo Pulse gathers a crisis in progress into one live picture, for critical-infrastructure operators where an outage is not an option. The same picture has to be useful to the person managing the event and to the one checking in on it.
The challenge was never adding more information. It was deciding what each of them needs to see, and when.
This case study is about the early part.
Three things, concretely. How the product was cut into modules, so that very different customers get very different versions of it. Why each new module gets built as a working prototype before anyone can write a spec for it. And the design-to-code workflow that came out of doing that at volume.
Scattered, then one picture, then three readers
What decides a response sits in separate systems, in documents and on paper. One picture has to gather all of it, and then answer to three readers at the same time.
Different customers, one product
Seismo Pulse is aimed at organisations that have to keep something running: hospitals, airlines, cantons, federal offices, the postal service. That list is not closed. They all have crises and none of them means the same thing by one. An incident at an airline can be a crash. At a grid operator it can be a defect on a pylon that someone has to note before the end of the shift.
So it could not be one screen with a fixed set of panels. Every capability is a module, and a module has to pass two tests: it can be switched off for a customer without breaking what is left, and it owns its own kind of thing, whether that is incidents, tasks, journal entries or contacts. Modularity is a word every product deck uses. Here it was the first constraint rather than a feature.
The situation picture is the module they all share and the one every customer starts from. What differs is what stands around it, and what an entry in it turns out to mean.
One module list, two scopes
The structure. Every item in the rail is a module that owns its own kind of thing: incidents, tasks, journal entries, contacts. The situation picture is the one they all share, and the one every customer starts from.
Prototypes as the argument
The module set is designed to keep growing. Every customer conversation either adds one or sharpens one, and a module nobody has seen yet cannot be specified. So it gets built as a prototype first and written down after. That makes prototyping the method here rather than a phase: it is how each next module gets decided, one at a time.
Nobody in this domain buys a concept off a slide. So instead of presenting pictures of an idea, we demoed something running.
We prototyped heavily, AI-assisted on MUI, and took working prototypes into the demos. Clicking through the thing rather than describing it is what won stakeholders over. Doing that at volume forced the next question: how to keep producing them without quality dropping on the way to code.
From design to code, without the drop
The obvious move was to point Figma’s MCP server at the design file. It half worked, which is worse than failing. A Figma file is organised for the person who designs it, not the way markup is, so the model pays for how a design is assembled long before it reaches how to build it.
What replaced it is duller and works. Tokens leave Figma as a raw export, scripts rewrite them into the structure Cando’s developers already use, and the bridge is kept in sync, which is what makes it infrastructure rather than a one-off conversion. It has a price, and design pays it: one hand-picked colour and the thing the bridge exists to guarantee is gone.
A feature now starts from the ticket, a screenshot of the Figma frame and the design system as markdown. The developers’ own estimate of the difference is 3×, and the practice left the design team entirely: sales and product owners prompt on top of the real codebase, so a pitch stands on where the product actually is rather than on a disconnected artefact.
The workflow turned out to be the deliverable.
It was built to make prototypes for demos. What it produced was a shared place where design, engineering and the people who decide explore the same product, and Figma screens reach finished features far better than they did. What is still open is the step itself: design, prototyping and implementation are three moves in a row and they should be one, an exploration that flows into code instead of being handed across a boundary each time. That is the next thing to solve, and I do not have it yet.
From an idea to something running
Prototypes. Product, design and development each hand over what they own: the idea, the tokens and the guidelines, the markdown the model needs. What comes back is running software, and the loops are gone.
3× faster start on a new feature
My contribution
- Led the concept and UX: how incidents, threats and assets resolve into one picture that still reads at every level.
- Designed the modular structure: what counts as a module, what a customer can switch off, and how the same module works organisation-wide and inside one situation.
- Drove the prototyping practice, AI-assisted on MUI, that put working software in front of stakeholders instead of slides.
- Built the design-to-code workflow behind it, and carried the practice out to sales and product ownership.
Protected material
Interface screens from the live platform, and the prototypes the workflow produced.
The product is in development for critical-infrastructure operators, so the interface is not public.
Open the protected version →Credentials are in my application, or ask me.
Outcome
3×
faster feature starts, measured by the developers
Workflow
one shared bridge from Figma tokens to code, kept in sync
1
product, configured per customer rather than rebuilt
Seismo Pulse is in active development at ecmt in Winterthur. The module structure is there so a new customer is a configuration rather than a rebuild. And the prototyping practice did more than win the demos it was built for: it left the design team, and the workflow behind it is now how features start and how the product gets pitched. None of which was the plan.