Business & Organizational impact
Outcome
Opportunity & Approach
Strategy
Opportunity
Approach
A system-level response required:
Cross-functional
Alignment & Validation
Alignment

Risks
Every risk had a designed response. That was the point.
Designers joining mid-project with no shared context
Building something DSA-specific that breaks at the next regulation
Output
My Deliverables
Years of regulatory ambiguity, one system to resolve it. Here's what I built.



Trade-offs
Where it got interesting
System vs. screen-by-screen fixes
Tension
Teams wanted quick patches per requirement; Business wanted to meet minimum standards.
Decision: System
Slower upfront, faster and safer at scale.
Global approach vs. EU-only compliance
Tension
Legal initially favored minimum EU compliance; Design disagreed
Decision: Mixed
Global patterns with geo adaptations, anticipating future regulations.
Designer autonomy vs. consistency
Tension
Teams pushed back on centralized design guidance, viewing it as a bottleneck.
Decision: Consistency
Brought designers together to co-create shared standards rather than impose top-down rules, then documented them as org-wide guidelines.
What I did
My Role
This project had no precedent inside the org. There was no playbook, no prior art, and a legal team who needed design to speak their language. Here's what I was accountable for.
DSA compliance lead: 6 design teams, design reviews, Legal partnership
Cross-team alignment: Guidelines, workshops, shared standards
Pattern creation: Initial flows (reporting, transparency) adopted org-wide
Compliance fails when you design it screen by screen. Trust and regulation scale only as systems.



