The SD Plus Stuff Database is a collaborative
faculty platform developed for the
School of Design at The
Hong Kong Polytechnic University (PolyU). It was designed to empower
academic staff by making it easier to discover potential
collaborators, explore faculty expertise, and initiate
interdisciplinary connections within the School and across other
registered PolyU departments. The platform provides a central
digital space for faculty profiles, project showcases, and academic
interests, aiming to foster a more connected and collaborative
research environment.
I leading the entire design direction and execution in close collaboration with Kenneth Chan. My role was both strategic and hands-on — I was responsible for establishing the platform’s user experience, visual language, and front-end implementation.
At the beginning of the project, the School of Design identified a growing need for better internal collaboration. While PolyU boasts a diverse and talented faculty body, opportunities for interdisciplinary work were often missed due to a lack of visibility into who was working on what, and how to reach out effectively. Faculty members often relied on word of mouth or personal contacts to find collaborators, which was inefficient and limited.
Our goal was to create a platform that could function as an academic "intranet" — a tool where faculty could easily build and maintain profiles, highlight their research, and find others with complementary expertise. Importantly, the system needed to be simple enough for users who may not be tech-savvy, while flexible enough to scale across departments over time.
To begin, I conducted interviews with five faculty members from various design disciplines to understand their needs, habits, and pain points when it came to collaboration. I also coordinated with the administrative team to gain insights into current internal communication tools and any existing databases. Through these sessions, we discovered a common desire for a searchable directory that went beyond basic contact info — users wanted to know what others were working on, what skills they had, and whether they were open to collaboration or mentorship.
In parallel, I ran an online survey that reached over 30 faculty
members across PolyU. The responses reinforced our findings: most
users were frustrated by the lack of visibility into their
colleagues’ work and found existing systems outdated or fragmented.
Many were interested in a lightweight solution that allowed browsing
by research topic, filtering by department, and direct access to
faculty publications and projects.
With clear goals and user insights in place, I began shaping the information architecture of the platform. I identified four core components that needed to be clearly structured: People (faculty profiles), Projects, Departments, and Research Interests. I created user flows for core tasks such as browsing the directory, filtering by expertise, and editing a profile.
Next, I sketched initial low-fidelity wireframes using Figma, focusing on the user journey for first-time users and returning contributors. These early drafts were tested with stakeholders, and based on their feedback, I iterated on the layout and hierarchy — prioritizing key details like research keywords, department affiliation, and collaboration availability.
I then moved on to high-fidelity prototyping. I incorporated PolyU’s visual identity while keeping the interface minimal and content-focused. The design used a card-based layout for search results and faculty profiles, enabling users to quickly scan and compare profiles. To avoid overwhelming users, I implemented progressive disclosure: showing key information upfront with options to expand for more details.
One of the key design features was the filter and search system. Users could search by name, keyword, department, or research interest. I also added a tagging system to support fast categorization of skills and expertise, which helped faculty find collaborators outside their own discipline more easily.
To validate the design, I conducted two rounds of usability testing. In the first round, I tested clickable Figma prototypes with five faculty members. The feedback was mostly positive, particularly regarding the clean UI and logical search flow. However, users suggested improvements to the profile-editing process and asked for clearer calls to action for reaching out to others.
In response, I refined the interaction design for the editing interface, introducing inline editing and clearer feedback when saving changes. I also added visual indicators showing whether a user was open to collaboration or supervision, making it easier to take the next step after discovering someone relevant.
The second round of testing showed significant improvement in user satisfaction. Participants were able to complete key tasks—such as finding someone in a different department with similar research interests—without assistance. This validated our core user experience approach and gave us confidence to move forward with development.
The platform was successfully launched to the School of Design faculty as a minimum viable product (MVP). Within the first three weeks, over 80% of the academic staff created profiles and began tagging their areas of expertise. Faculty reported that they discovered colleagues they hadn’t previously known were working on similar topics. Some early collaborations were even initiated directly through the platform, which exceeded our initial expectations.
Feedback from department heads was also positive, especially regarding how the system provided a clearer overview of faculty capabilities and research themes across the School. Based on this success, there are now plans to scale the platform across other faculties and potentially integrate it with existing university-wide research management tools.
This project was a rewarding challenge, particularly because it addressed a real and recurring pain point in academic environments. I learned how important it is to balance institutional requirements with user-centered design — faculty members needed something quick and frictionless, while the School required structure and scalability.
One of the biggest takeaways for me was how iterative feedback — especially from users who were initially skeptical — made the design much stronger. By grounding decisions in actual user needs, we were able to build something that felt useful from day one.
If I were to continue evolving this product, I would explore integrating messaging or collaboration request features directly into the platform. I would also consider syncing the database with academic publication tools like ORCID or Scopus to automatically enrich user profiles with publications and citations.
