What moved
The browser title now reads Allē · Dual-Surface Loyalty Redesign · 30M Members, 40K Practices · Juno Chen. Dual-surface scope, scale, and name in the tab. The OG title names both surfaces. The meta description packs role, scope, scale, and three outcome metrics into one line. These are the surfaces that show up in Slack previews and recruiter link-shares. They were broken before. They work now. Apply this pattern to every other teaser.
The six-row brief on the right side of the hero — Company, Product, Role, Team, Scale, Outcome — carries the strategic load. Role says "Product Design Director." Team says "3 product designers · UX research · brand." Scale says "30M+ members · 40K+ provider practices." These are the lines a hiring manager scans before deciding whether to read the paragraph. Present, correctly ordered.
Now the problems.
1. Title and framing
The on-page headline: When the product is someone's face, points aren't enough.
It's well-written, but it's doing the wrong work. A hiring manager scanning five teasers in two minutes needs to know what this case proves, not what the product category feels like. The headline anchors on domain when it should anchor on design challenge — dual-surface loyalty at scale. The eyebrow (Allē · Allergan Aesthetics · 2021) adds company and date but no scope signal.
The six-row brief compensates, but it reads as supporting detail. The headline is what writes the evaluator's first impression.
Rewrite:
Redesigning loyalty across two surfaces, 30M members, and 40K provider practices.
Less polished, but it puts the case in the right category. Move the atmospheric line to a subtitle if you want to keep it.
2. Strategic premise
The opening paragraph works:
"30 million enrolled members. A loyalty program almost none of them understood. Built to move Allergan's products through providers, it was never designed for the patient or the practice. I redesigned across consumer iOS and provider backoffice — and defined the strategy connecting them."
Scale, problem, dual-surface scope, strategic contribution, four sentences. The bolded lead gives the scanner a number to anchor on before the narrative begins. Strongest element on the page. Leave it.
Two flags. The full case's problem section references 18 million enrolled members at the time of the relaunch, while the teaser and the full-case hero both say 30 million. If 30M is the current state and 18M was the starting point, make that distinction explicit somewhere. The teaser eyebrow also says 2021; the full case's hero says 2020. Neither discrepancy is fatal on its own. But a hiring manager who catches either will read it as carelessness with the data you're asking them to trust.
3. Outcome proof
The Outcome row — 3.2× redemption · 47% reactivation · $42 CAC — sits at roughly 900–910 pixels from the top. On a 1440×900 viewport, it falls just below the fold.
This determines how the evaluator categorizes the case. A hiring manager who sees "30M members" but not "3.2× redemption" files this as a large-scale project. One who sees both files it as a large-scale project that moved business metrics. In a debrief, those are different categories, and the second one is the category you want.
Fix: Tighten vertical spacing in the hero to pull the Outcome row above 900px. CSS change. 30 minutes.
4. Craft signal
No product images on the first screen. The first product mosaic begins at roughly 1,045 pixels from the top. The hero is typographic: headline, paragraph, brief, a faint grid background, a translucent "05" watermark.
For a quick-scan evaluator, this means the first screen makes a strategic claim with no visual proof that a designer made it. The paragraph says "I redesigned across consumer iOS and provider backoffice," but nothing on the screen shows that work. At Director+ level, craft evidence doesn't need to dominate the hero — it needs to exist there. One image of the dual-surface system, consumer app alongside provider dashboard, large enough to confirm visual quality, would close this gap.
Fix: Pull one frame from the existing mosaic into the hero. Consumer iOS and provider dashboard side by side, roughly 40% of hero width, below the brief. 1–2 hours depending on whether the asset exists as a standalone.
5. CTA
No CTA on the first screen. The two CTAs later in the page both read Request the full case study and link to cs-06-alle.html, which redirects to a password-gated access screen.
Two problems. "Request" sets an expectation of friction. A hiring manager scanning quickly treats friction as a reason to move on. And the access screen — Enter your access password, or email juno@junochen.com to request one — is abrupt after a teaser that builds a strategic case. I flagged this pattern in issue #5 and again in issue #6. Still unresolved.
Rewrite the CTA label:
View full case study →
If the page requires authentication, the access screen handles that. The CTA's job is to earn the click, and by the time the reader reaches the button, the teaser has already established the dual-surface, metrics-driven frame. Reducing friction in the label matters more here than restating the claim.
Priority-ranked changes
- Pull the Outcome row above the fold. CSS spacing. 30 minutes. Highest impact per effort — this is the line that separates "large project" from "large project that moved metrics" in the evaluator's head.
- Add one product image to the hero. 1–2 hours. Without it, the first screen is a strategy brief with no craft proof. That's a categorization problem.
- Rewrite the headline to lead with dual-surface scope and scale. 15 minutes of copy. The current headline is good writing doing the wrong job.
- Change the CTA label from "Request the full case study" to "View full case study →". 5 minutes.
- Reconcile the 18M/30M member figures and the 2020/2021 date discrepancy across teaser and full case. 15 minutes.
Items 1, 4, and 5 are under an hour combined. Do those first.
- Allē's dual-surface economics: OpenAI's new Product Designer, Payments role asks designers to make complex financial logic trustworthy at scale — Allē's consumer/provider split is the closest published evidence Juno has for that claim, which means the teaser's positioning choices ripple into outreach copy.
- The full-case gate problem: OWASP classifies browser-only authorization as presentation rather than access control, which means the password overlay on Allē's full case delivers the content before checking whether the visitor should see it.
- Craft proof under time pressure: Figma's recruiter guidance recommends showing evidence most pertinent to the role rather than comprehensive history, reinforcing why one well-chosen dual-surface image in the hero outperforms a mosaic 145 pixels below the fold.
- The 18M vs 30M question: The full case's problem section says 18 million enrolled members at relaunch while the hero and teaser both claim 30M — if these represent different timepoints, making that trajectory explicit turns a potential credibility gap into a growth story.