← Selected work

Case study · Enterprise operations

Unifying incident operations at a Fortune 50 telecom

From a half-dozen disconnected systems to one command center for visibility and faster resolution.

All visuals on this page are abstracted recreations drawn with fictional data. The client's actual interfaces, branding, and data are confidential.

Context

Network operations at national scale: thousands of incidents moving through monitoring, field operations, engineering, and communications teams at once. Each team tracked its slice of the work in its own tool — ticketing here, dispatch there, spreadsheets and chat threads filling the gaps. No system held the whole incident.

Problem

Fragmented visibility made every question expensive. Triage was slow because assembling the current state of an incident meant checking several systems and asking around. Teams duplicated work they couldn't see each other doing. And the most common question in the building — "what's the status?" — was answered by phone call, because no screen could answer it.

Approach

We designed a unified command center: one place where an incident is seen, worked, and resolved. Role-based views arrange a single shared record for each job to be done. An incident timeline holds the one ordered history of what happened. Cross-team workflows hand work off without losing context. Global search spans every entity in the system. And AI-generated summaries were treated as a designed trust surface — with visible confidence, fallbacks, and human takeover — rather than a feature bolted on.

Design decisions

1 · One incident record, many lenses

Every team had asked for "their own dashboard." We built the opposite: a single shared incident record, with role-based views that rearrange it for the job at hand. Operations sees the queue and severity; field crews see location and tasking; leadership sees impact and trend. Same facts, no reconciliation, no version drift.

DISCONNECTED SOURCES CLAIMS INTAKE 10:41 ADJUSTER NOTES 10:02 PHOTOS (3) 10:15 POLICY & COVERAGE 09:12 PAYMENTS 09:17 EXTERNAL REPORTS 11:03 UNIFIED CLAIM RECORD IN REVIEW ONE ORDERED HISTORY FNOL RECEIVED SOURCE · CLAIMS INTAKE ADJUSTER NOTE ADDED SOURCE · ADJUSTER NOTES PHOTOS UPLOADED (3) SOURCE · MOBILE APP DAMAGE EXCEEDS POLICY LIMIT SOURCE · EXTERNAL REPORT PAYMENT ESTIMATE GENERATED SOURCE · CLAIMS SYSTEM CUSTOMER STATEMENT RECEIVED SOURCE · CUSTOMER PORTAL GENERATED SUMMARY 87% CONFIDENCE SOURCES (6) ↳ CLAIM RECORD ↳ ADJUSTER NOTE ↳ CUSTOMER STATEMENT ↳ EXTERNAL REPORT ↳ PHOTOS (3) ↳ PAYMENT ESTIMATE VIEW RAW RECORD FIG. 03 — ONE WORKING RECORD
Six systems, one record. Every event names the source it came from; the exception carries a diamond and oxide, never color alone; and source content stays drawn as redacted — the confidentiality constraint is the drawing language. Abstracted recreation, fictional data.

2 · The timeline is the source of truth

Events from every connected system land in one ordered incident history: detections, dispatches, escalations, notes, status changes. Conversations and status displays derive from the timeline instead of competing with it. When the history lives in one place, "what's the status?" becomes a screen, not a phone call — and handoffs stop losing context at shift change.

Source systems One ordered history
Scattered event streams merged into a single ordered incident history — exceptions carry a diamond and oxide, never color alone.

3 · AI summaries as a designed trust surface

Long incidents accumulate hundreds of timeline events, so the console generates plain-language summaries. We designed the summary as a trust surface, not a text box: confidence is displayed, every claim links back to its timeline sources, the fallback when the model is unavailable or uncertain is the raw timeline itself, and a human can take over the narrative in one action. The system earns trust by exposing its limits.

Generated summary Confidence ▮▮▮▯ Sources Edit as human Regenerate Fallback · model unavailable Human takeover
The summary's anatomy: confidence, sources, a fallback that degrades to the raw record, and a one-action human takeover.

4 · Search that spans every entity

The fastest triage tool is finding the thing. Global search covers every entity in the system — incidents, locations, equipment, teams — from one keyboard-first field, with results grouped by type. No more knowing which tool to ask; the console answers for all of them.

INC-4821 Incidents Locations Teams Equipment
One query, every entity type — grouped results with fictional data.

5 · The failure state is designed for a person

Everything above still has to work in the worst hour, for someone who did not choose this moment to learn an interface. So the failure states refuse to dead-end: when the AI summary is unavailable, the screen shows the raw timeline — the actual record — instead of an apology, and handing the situation to a human is one action, not a support ticket. Designed for the operator having a bad day; in insurance, that operator is standing between you and a policyholder having a worse one.

MODEL UNAVAILABLE SHOWING THE RECORD INSTEAD HAND TO OPERATOR RETRY
The fallback is the record itself: timeline still visible, one action to a human, no dead end. Fictional data.

Outcomes

The numbers from this engagement belong to the client and haven’t been cleared for publication — and I don’t publish figures I can’t stand behind. What travels is the architecture: the decisions above shipped, and the section below is what they mean for insurance operations.

The transferable pattern

Strip away the industry and this is the architecture insurance operations run on: high volumes of time-sensitive cases, worked by multiple teams, under scrutiny, where the cost of a lost handoff is measured in customer trust. The same four decisions map directly.

  • One record, many lenses A claims workbench where adjusters, SIU, and supervisors work one claim file through role-based views — no swivel-chairing between systems, no reconciling copies.
  • The timeline as source of truth Claim status a policyholder or agent can read instead of calling about — and an audit-ready history when a regulator or compliance review asks what happened and when.
  • AI as a trust surface AI triage and claim summaries with visible confidence, sources, and adjuster takeover — the difference between automation your team trusts and automation they route around.
  • Search across every entity CAT dashboards and fraud-triage queues that surface the right case at the right moment, when volume spikes and prioritization is the whole game.

If your claims workbench, CAT operation, or triage queue still looks like the "before" picture — many tools, no shared record, status answered by phone — that's exactly the shape of problem the audit is built to find.

Book a Call