Rebuilding a $9B corporate front door.

What arrived in writing: "Something feels off about the corporate site. Can you take a look?" No defined scope, no KPIs, no named deliverables.

What emerged over two scoping calls: Marketing had recently led a brand refresh and was protective of the visual identity. Investor Relations was quietly frustrated that share price data was buried three clicks deep. People & Culture had just lost a senior hire who cited a poor careers experience. Three teams, one shared symptom, and nobody measuring it the same way.

Rather than anchor to one team's wishlist, I framed the engagement as a neutral diagnosis — one every internal stakeholder could trust because it reported to the evidence, not to whoever held the budget.

I ran four parallel research tracks and converged them into a single synthesis. The rule: only findings that appeared in at least two tracks made it into the final report. Everything else went in the appendix.

Twenty-four individual findings synthesised into six themes, each scored by severity and competitive standing. The three rated high-priority were also the three lowest-ranked against all four competitors — no coincidence.

My deliverable was the audit and a set of wireframes showing how the key recommendations could work in practice. The team took those forward. The site has since been redesigned along similar lines — and the Adobe Analytics data is starting to show it.