case study

The emails were the symptom
There was a gap between strategy and inbox

A lifecycle redesign that unified 12 email journeys, boosted click-to-open rates by 41%, and made the brand's voice finally match its execution

The rescue nobody wanted to admit was needed

Five months with a US smart home security brand, working across consumer and business lifecycle email. Straightforward enough on paper

In practice, it was something more complicated. A small team brought in because things weren't working: not broken exactly, but unfinished. The voice was right. The instincts were right. Somewhere between strategy and send, things fell apart

Marketing were firefighting

Developers were patching brittle templates

Twelve disconnected journeys were pulling in different directions

Inbox first

Render simulators will tell you what an email looks like. They won't tell you what it feels like to receive one

So the obvious move was to become the customer

I signed up for everything. Every journey, every persona: the live customer, the lapsed one, the person who'd just moved into a house with the security system already installed. Not on a simulator. In a real inbox, on the devices that the data said actually mattered

It was the only way to feel where the experience held and where it quietly fell apart

The gaps weren’t in the strategy
They were hiding in the experience

What got built

Somewhere in the middle of this, an abandoned cart email arrived

You have some items left in your cart

That was it. No image. No reminder of what was in there or why it had seemed worth buying

But the customer was already interested. They'd already done the hard part. The email's job wasn't to bring them back to the site: it was to do the thinking for them. To remind them what they'd seen, why it had felt right, and make it effortless to say yes

Focus outperforms completeness

  • Didn't move the needle

    • visual polish tweaks
    • decorative imagery
    • micro-copy flourishes
  • Priority levers

    • CTA clarity + intent
    • mobile-first hierarchy
    • restrained personalisation
  • Not worth it

    • multi-language template variants
    • over-engineered dynamic logic
    • legal-heavy features with marginal upside
  • Valuable, not viable

    • full redesign
    • new component system
    • deeper behavioural personalisation

Closing the gap

The prioritisation exercise surfaced three areas worth focusing on: CTA clarity and intent, mobile-first hierarchy, and restrained personalisation

Twelve journeys were rebuilt around those principles

Type that works at a glance

Users don't read emails. They scan until something stops them

Every sizing decision here was made for the moment of recognition, not the full read

Before screen
After screen

The first screen is the only screen you're guaranteed

Message and CTA above the fold

Not as a best practice, but because that's where the decision happens

Before screen
After screen

Perso with purpose

The data that existed was good, it just wasn't being used

Personalisation that had been sitting unused started doing actual work: real-time content, product images in abandoned carts, recommendations that reflected what someone had already shown interest in

Before screen
After screen

Impact

These numbers didn't come from a new strategy
They came from finally aligning execution with intent

+28% CTR

Customers on mobile who could see the CTA actually clicked it

+11% CTR

Tighter headlines did the thinking so the customer didn't have to

+41% CTOR

Emails that remembered what the brand knew about its customers. The numbers noticed

The payoff

The problem was never intent. The fix was making sure the execution was finally worthy of it

"Ian brought true design leadership — raising the quality of our work, guiding the team with clarity, and pushing us to think more strategically about the user experience"

Christine Zeng Lead Product Manager

What was built

The work wasn’t just rebuilding emails
It was rebuilding the system behind them

Consistent UX patterns

Aligned Figma and SFMC patterns to reduce dev time and errors

Automation-ready templates

Dynamic link generator and real-time basket tracking streamlined ops

Continuous optimisation loops

A/B testing revealed what worked, from motion to message and offer

Design decisions

What guided the design

Readable-first email hierarchy, ensuring key messages remained clear within crowded inbox environments and constrained email layouts

Less content, clearer storytelling, reducing cognitive load so recipients could quickly understand the purpose of each email

Mobile-first structure, allowing messages to remain legible and scannable on small screens where most emails were opened

Trade-offs

Message clarity over legal prominence, keeping the primary message visible above the fold rather than buried beneath compliance text

Standardised layouts over bespoke designs, making lifecycle journeys easier to maintain and reuse across campaigns

Reliable rendering over visual complexity, ensuring emails displayed consistently across inconsistent email clients

Deliberately omitted

Heavy personalisation that felt artificial, avoiding messaging that could appear overly automated or insincere

Custom mobile font embedding, which added technical complexity without meaningfully improving readability

Decorative features that added little value, keeping the focus on message clarity rather than visual novelty

Learnings

Clarity, placement, and personalisation shifted behaviour

Content

Personalisation works when it's useful, not when it's clever

Formats

Animated GIFs looked tacky on paper. The data disagreed. Used sparingly, they outperformed static alternatives

Process

Becoming the customer was the research. Everything else validated it

Quirks

Outlook continues to work in mysterious ways, but there’s (usually) a fix

Tools

Figma
SFMC Salesforce
VS Code
HTML5
CSS
After Effects
AMPscript
Inbox Monster

Want experiences people actually engage with?

Let’s go

Snack on some more case studies