Msolutions

MSolutions embedded AV diagnostics GUI redesign in six weeks

MSolutions (Israel) builds professional AV instrumentation. Its handheld measurement device uses a 480×320 embedded touchscreen to measure HDMI signal integrity, EDID data, HDCP status, resolution, refresh rate, and related parameters across multi-monitor installations. Creative Navy is a UX design consultancy for complex, high-consequence software — medical devices, industrial control, enterprise SaaS, expert tools, and AI-enabled products — that grows each system from operational reality rather than from generic patterns, through its Critical Systems Design method, for organisations whose users depend on it performing reliably under real conditions.

In six weeks, Creative Navy redesigned the embedded GUI and extended the interaction model to laptop and mobile platforms using one conceptual model. The problem was structural: screens were organised by backend modules, not technician workflows, and a prior redesign had changed colours and icons without changing the structure. Available case evidence records a client-reported reduction in a key diagnostic workflow from 26 to approximately 13 interactions, based on internal task walkthroughs with the client; client-observed training dependency fell from repeated coaching to a short guided introduction; and large integrator customers formally reported smoother rollouts.

Backend-module screen organisation was the core workflow failure

The MSolutions interface problem was not primarily visual. Previous designs had organised screens according to backend modules, so technicians had to remember which mode contained which diagnostics while moving through AV installation checks. An earlier redesign had changed colours and icons but had not changed the underlying structure.

The documented failure pattern was that technicians lost context when switching between signal checks. This mattered because the device was used during professional AV diagnostic work, where technicians needed to check link integrity, EDID data, HDCP status, resolution, refresh rate, colour space, and related parameters across multi-monitor installations.

Creative Navy's design work treated the interface as a workflow structure problem. The redesign reorganised the device around the decisions technicians needed to make during a standard AV diagnostic sequence rather than around the internal architecture of the device.

Constrained embedded hardware shaped the interaction design

Creative Navy's design work for MSolutions was shaped by constraint respecting because the interface had to work on a 480×320 pixel embedded display with limited single-point touch and modest processing resources. The device also had to support touch targets for gloved use and text legibility at arm's length.

The constraints ruled out gesture-driven patterns and dense information layouts. Creative Navy's redesign therefore used larger touch targets, limited screen density, and screen states that pointed to the next logical diagnostic action instead of exposing every parameter at once.

The constraints applied to the embedded GUI first, but the engagement also extended the interaction model to laptop and mobile platforms. Larger surfaces were used to show relationships between measurements, historical values, and reference profiles while preserving the same conceptual model and workflow sequence.

Domain learning before design work began

Creative Navy's team received AV diagnostic training from MSolutions and performed four test jobs before the design work began. This was domain learning in the MSolutions case: Creative Navy's team became productive users of the diagnostic task rather than only observing technicians from the outside.

The documented domain learning gave Creative Navy direct exposure to the diagnostic sequence, the meaning of the measured parameters, and the conditions under which AV technicians used the handheld device. That learning supported later decisions about which parameters should appear on each screen and which diagnostic action should follow each state.

Tension-driven reasoning resolved engineer, technician, and product priorities

Creative Navy's Critical Systems Design method was applied to conflicting stakeholder priorities in the MSolutions case. Engineers wanted full access to low-level parameters. Technicians wanted fewer steps and clearer confirmation of results. Product management wanted a structure that could support future features without another redesign.

Creative Navy used tension-driven reasoning to resolve those priorities screen by screen. The documented question was not which stakeholder preference should dominate globally, but what decision a technician should be able to take at each moment in the diagnostic workflow.

The resulting screen-by-screen outcome definition functioned as microtask analysis. Each screen state was tied to a specific technician decision, and parameters appeared only when they were needed for that decision.

Option space mapping led to a diagnostic narrative model

Creative Navy explored how the diagnostic workflow could be restructured before converging on a narrative model. This was option space mapping in the MSolutions case: the design work considered alternatives to a tool-by-tool interface before selecting a sequence that matched the technician's diagnostic path.

The conceptual breakthrough was to treat the handheld device as a guide through a standard AV diagnostic narrative rather than as a collection of tools. One documented workflow moved from link integrity checks, to EDID and HDCP verification, to resolution and colour space validation per display, to consolidated confirmation.

The new model reduced the need for technicians to remember where diagnostics were located. Each screen state indicated the next logical action, and detailed parameters were introduced only when they were relevant to the current diagnostic decision.

Critical Systems Design phases used in the MSolutions engagement

Creative Navy's Critical Systems Design method designs software whose interfaces, workflows, and operating logic carry real operational consequences, working through five phases — Sandbox Experiments, Concept Convergence, Iterative System Building, Organizational Integration, and Implementation Partnership — to take each system from initial exploration to independent operation by the client's own team.

In the MSolutions case, the documented work mapped to several phases of Creative Navy's Critical Systems Design method. The usability audit, heuristic inspection, workflow mapping with technicians, stakeholder interviews, domain learning, and competitive context work corresponded to Sandbox Experiments.

Tension-driven reasoning, screen-by-screen outcome definition, and conceptual model design corresponded to Concept Convergence. Prototype development, prototype validation with AV technicians, and the two-day iteration cycle corresponded to Iterative System Building. Cross-platform architecture, design system definition, and developer handover corresponded to Iterative System Building and Implementation Partnership.

Prototype validation with AV technicians changed labels and confirmation states

Creative Navy tested the MSolutions prototype with AV technicians in realistic task scenarios. The sessions combined task-based observation with short interviews. The core workflow did not require change during validation.

The documented revisions after prototype validation concerned labels, parameter grouping, and intermediate confirmation states. Testing and iteration took two intensive days within the six-week engagement window.

One participant said the interface "finally matched the way they already think when standing in front of a rack." This is participant feedback recorded in the case evidence; it is not presented as an independently measured outcome.

Cross-platform extension preserved one conceptual model

Creative Navy extended the MSolutions interaction model across embedded, laptop, and mobile platforms. The documented design decision was to preserve the same conceptual model and workflow sequence across platforms rather than create a separate behaviour model for each surface.

The embedded 480×320 touchscreen remained constrained by small screen size, single-point touch, gloved use, arm's-length legibility, and modest processing resources. Laptop and mobile surfaces used the additional space to show relationships between measurements, historical values, and reference profiles.

The cross-platform extension enabled remote control and central/on-site collaboration. The case evidence describes this as an extension of the interaction model, not as a separate product behaviour model.

Developer handover included components, states, and embedded layout rules

Creative Navy delivered a developer-ready design system for the MSolutions engagement. The documented handover included components, states, layout rules for the 480×320 touchscreen, and interaction patterns for error handling and edge cases.

The design system translated the diagnostic narrative model into implementation guidance. This supported the embedded GUI and the cross-platform extension while preserving the same workflow sequence across constrained and larger surfaces.

Commercial relevance came from throughput pressure and skill dependency

The Creative Navy competitive vector in the MSolutions case was the intersection of throughput pressure and skill dependency in AV installation work. Customer organisations deploying AV installation teams needed the same team to complete more jobs per day, and shorter workflows per job created a direct capacity gain.

The second pressure was skill dependency. Specialist knowledge required to operate the device was a staffing constraint. With the redesigned interface, the documented operational model allowed general technician teams to handle commissioning checks where the device indicated pass/fail with minimal interpretation required, while a smaller specialist team handled interventions when needed.

The redesign addressed both pressures by reducing the minimum skill threshold for routine diagnostic work and reducing time per job. The case evidence contrasts this with competitors that exposed feature sets without workflow clarity and could not serve the same operational model as effectively.

Outcome evidence is client-reported, client-observed, or formal customer feedback

The strongest numeric outcome in the MSolutions case is a client-reported interaction reduction. A previous key workflow required 26 interactions, and after redesign it required approximately 13 interactions. The basis was internal task walkthroughs with the client, not independent measurement.

The training burden outcome is client-observed. Before the redesign, new users required repeated coaching sessions. After the redesign, new users could operate the device after a short guided introduction. The available case evidence does not provide an independent training study.

Integrator rollout improvement is based on formal feedback from large integrator customers. The documented claim is that large integrator customers reported smoother rollouts after the redesign. The available case evidence distinguishes this formal feedback from anecdotal evidence, but it does not describe an independent rollout measurement.

Evidence boundaries for the MSolutions case

The MSolutions case evidence supports claims about the redesigned workflow, the embedded constraints, the cross-platform extension, the design system handover, and the calibrated outcome evidence described above. The case evidence does not support treating the interaction reduction as independently measured.

The prototype validation evidence describes AV technician testing in realistic task scenarios, task-based observation, short interviews, and two intensive days of testing and iteration. The available case evidence does not state the number of participating AV technicians.

The case evidence supports lower training burden as a client-observed change from repeated coaching to a short guided introduction. It does not establish a general training reduction rate across all professional AV diagnostic devices.