Explainable AI that gave sellers their selling time back

Sellers had built their own quoting system in spreadsheets. I designed a Service-AI framework and the Quick Quote tool that kept the speed of their workaround and added what it lacked: explainable recommendations and human sign-off on every number.

★ 2026 Red Dot Design Award (opens in a new tab)

Quick Quote Create Estimate screen on a MacBook showing current usage and trends, configuration and pricing, and AI recommendations
FIG. 01.0 — QUICK QUOTE
My role
Lead Experience Designer · Service-AI Architect
Team
Product Managers, Designer, Engineers, Business Stakeholders
Timeline
Research, Design, and Development Feb – Nov 2025. Pilot Nov 2025 – Feb 2026 · Global Rollout Mar – Jun 2026
What I owned
Research, Service-AI framework, IA, interaction design, pilot, enablement
PROBLEM
Sellers spent 40–70% of their time on admin. One quote took up to an hour across ten tabs.
WHAT I DID
Mapped Quote-to-Cash with 18 people, defined a three-pillar Service-AI framework, and designed Quick Quote around human override.
OUTCOME
9.5/10 pilot satisfaction, usability up from 1.6 to 3.1, a 2026 Red Dot award, and 1,750 active sellers after rollout.

RESULTS · EVERY NUMBER WITH ITS SOURCE

Pilot satisfaction
9.5/10
MLP pilot, 37 sellers, US and LATAM
Usability score (of 4)
1.6 → 3.1
Moderated tests, 7 users, live build
Quotes generated
13,126
Telemetry, Apr 1 – Jun 3, 2026
Hours saved per year · projected
85K+
Time-motion analysis; about 82 FTEs
Incremental revenue · projected
$10–15M
Projection from the same team
01 — PROBLEM

The official tool wasn’t the workflow. It was the export destination.

Early in the research phase, I asked an Account Executive to walk me through how he built a quote. He pulled up his screen: not the quoting tool, but a Google Sheet. A sprawling, hand-crafted spreadsheet with colour-coded cells, formulas held together by hope, and data manually copied from a CRM open in another tab.

He shrugged and said something I've thought about many times since: “We spend more time fighting the tech than actually selling.”

The numbers backed him up. Research confirmed that Account Executives (AEs) and Customer Success Account Managers (CSAMs) were spending 40 to 70% of their time on non-revenue-generating administrative work. Building a single quote could take up to an hour. For every rep. Every opportunity. Every day.

Three structural failures defined the crisis:

  • Cognitive overload by design. Reps toggled between CRM systems, email threads, analytics dashboards, and spreadsheets, sometimes ten open tabs simultaneously, just to assemble the data needed to price a single renewal.
  • Abandoned automation. The official quoting tool wasn't being avoided because it couldn't do the job. It was being avoided because using it felt worse than doing the job manually.
  • A creativity ceiling on complex deals. Non-standard deal structures required workarounds the system was never designed to support, actively preventing the most strategic selling.

Quantitative analysis reinforced the qualitative picture: 71% of quotes required more than one configuration, extreme cases exceeded ten, and the average time from “Configure Products” to “Finalize” was 12 minutes, before counting the spreadsheet work happening outside the system entirely.

The legacy quoting process: Google Sheets built outside official systems, migrated into CPQ as a final step
Five structural failures, each a direct cause of rep disengagement
The business case: 171,000 hours annually spent on manual estimates, with a clear path to $10M in recovered productivity
02 — RESEARCH

The workaround was the research finding

Participants
18
Observations
550+
Deal records analysed
350K
Personas mapped
5

The Research Question

This wasn't a redesign problem. It was a human-AI design problem.

The central question guiding the work: how can enterprise systems leverage AI to restore human agency without creating a dangerous black-box dependency?

The goal was not to automate sales. It was to design a symbiotic system where AI absorbed the high-velocity data work that burned reps out, while humans retained full authority over the strategic decisions that required judgment, relationships, and accountability. Machine logic at scale. Human empathy at the moment of truth.

Discovery and Journey Mapping

We started where every good design process starts: with the people doing the work.

I facilitated persona-led contextual inquiry workshops with 18 participants spanning the full Quote-to-Cash lifecycle. Account Executives handling new business, AEs managing install base, CSAMs, Deal Desk specialists, and Revenue Operations. We gathered over 550 observational notes and mapped friction points with surgical precision.

The findings were stark. Participants were spending up to 70% of their time on manual estimates built in Google Sheets, complex custom spreadsheets that lived entirely outside the official quoting system, before migrating data into CPQ tools as a final step. The official system wasn't the workflow. It was the export destination.

Account Executive
Customer Success Account Manager
Revenue Operations
The Sales GTM Journey Map: tracing the full Quote-to-Cash lifecycle across all five personas

The Journey Map exercise was our shared reckoning. Printed and assembled for cross-functional review, it made visible for the first time the full arc of a sales rep's experience, including the unexpected hot spots where frustration peaked and workarounds proliferated. It created the shared understanding that made every subsequent design decision possible.

Four emerged themes that became the north star for all design decisions
03 — ARCHITECTURE

AI absorbs the data work. Humans keep every decision.

Qualitative research tells you where the pain lives. Data tells you how much it costs.

We analyzed 350,000 historical sales opportunities to identify the highest-leverage points for cognitive relief: the moments in the quote-building process where AI assistance could deliver the most time savings with the least disruption to user control.

From this analysis, I defined the Service-AI framework, a three-pillar operating model built to replace the linear, tightly-coupled logic of legacy SaaS platforms:

  • Orchestration. The AI acts as a synthesis engine, pulling real-time consumption data, historical contracts, and customer intelligence from disparate systems through a standardized MCP layer, eliminating the need for custom integrations at every touchpoint.
  • Execution. The Quick Quote interface enables rapid, iterative deal modelling. Prompt caching and stack-agnostic optimizations reduce latency by up to 80%, keeping the interface responsive during complex multi-variable configurations.
  • Human Override. The critical layer. The framework treats the generative model as a “Strategic Co-pilot” rather than an autonomous underwriter, the rep reviews, adjusts, approves, and owns every customer-facing artifact the system generates.
OrchestrationUsage, contracts and customer data pulled from every system
ExecutionOne pane builds estimates, quotes and proposal decks
Human overrideAI recommends; the rep reviews, adjusts and owns it
FIG. 01.3 — SERVICE-AI FRAMEWORK
Three core capabilities that replaced the manual, disconnected workflow

Those three pillars didn't stay abstract for long. They decomposed into five foundational architecture decisions, the load-bearing pieces that every subsequent screen and workflow had to respect.

Five foundational pillars underpinning the Quick Quote architecture

Together, the pillars and the capabilities they enabled resolved into a single Experience Architecture blueprint, the artifact that aligned engineering constraints, business requirements, and user needs into one shared reference for every design and build decision that followed.

The Experience Architecture: a single blueprint aligning engineering constraints, business requirements, and user needs. Click to explore at full resolution.

Choosing the Design System. Speed forced an honest infrastructure decision. We began with Docusign's own INK Design System, but component requirements were outpacing what it could supply at the velocity we needed. We assessed several open-source systems, including Salesforce Lightning, and adopted IBM's Carbon Design System for its flexibility and component depth. Pragmatism over pride: the right foundation mattered more than the in-house one.

Docusign INK → Salesforce Lightning (evaluated) → IBM Carbon: the design system decision, laid out side by side
04 — KEY DECISIONS

A tooltip wasn’t enough to defend a discount to a client

Decision record 01EXPLAINABILITY
What we saw
Reps hesitated to present an AI-recommended discount they couldn’t explain to a client.
Options
Keep the info tooltip · add a confidence score · show the full reasoning
Decision
An “AI Explained” panel: historical deal benchmarks, similar-customer data and the variables behind each recommended discount.
Trade-off
More screen space and data plumbing, in exchange for reps using recommendations with confidence.
AFTER · AI Explained panel
Decision record 02DESIGN SYSTEM
What we saw
Docusign’s INK design system couldn’t supply components at the velocity the project needed.
Options
Stay on INK · adopt Salesforce Lightning · adopt IBM Carbon
Decision
Adopt IBM’s Carbon Design System for its flexibility and component depth.
Trade-off
Gave up the in-house system for speed and component depth. “Pragmatism over pride.”
THE THREE OPTIONS, SIDE BY SIDE
Decision record 03CONSOLIDATION
What we saw
Assembling one quote meant checking ten browser tabs and copying data by hand.
Options
Bring all the necessary information on 1 screen. Create a simulator in a tab. Allow multiple tabs for complex configurations
Decision
A single pane that calculates discounts and net price on entry, with a Usage Trends module and one-click, fully editable proposals.
Trade-off
The team decided to exclude 2% quotes that involved extreme complexity.

A single pane instead of ten tabs. Previously, assembling data for a single quote meant checking information across 10 browser tabs and copying it manually. Quick Quote collapsed that fragmentation into a unified data pane that automatically calculated discounts and net prices on data entry. The Usage Trends module (consistently the most praised feature in research) integrated consumption data, feature adoption rates, and sticky features into one clear view. For the first time, reps could walk into a renewal conversation with the customer's full story already in front of them.

Quick Quote: everything a rep needs in a single, intelligent view

One click from data to proposal. A single complex proposal could previously take hours: pull data from one source, pricing from another, paste into Google Slides, format, check, re-check. Quick Quote's one-click proposal generation collated data from multiple sources and assembled a customer-ready presentation automatically, correctly formatted, factually grounded, and fully editable before sharing. The Clone and Modify feature extended this further, enabling side-by-side scenario modelling with instant price delta visualisation. What once required Revenue Operations intervention now took seconds.

Create Estimate: from scattered tabs to a guided, single-screen flow

Making AI recommendations explainable. The initial interface flagged AI-generated pricing recommendations with a standard information icon and a tooltip. In research sessions, we noticed users hesitated. They wouldn't present an AI-recommended discount to a client without understanding how it was calculated. We replaced the generic tooltip with a dedicated AI explanation component: a prominent panel that expanded on interaction to show the exact reasoning behind every recommendation, historical deal benchmarks, similar customer data, and the specific variables that influenced the suggested discount. Users who had hesitated shifted to using AI recommendations confidently as a starting point for client conversations. That change in behaviour was small to build and significant to witness.

AI Explained: transparent reasoning behind every recommendation, not just a number
Usage Trends: the customer's full story surfaced before the conversation begins
Quick Quote end-to-end: all major flows from estimate creation to quote generation
05 — VALIDATION

Tested on a live build, then a pilot of 37, then 1,750 sellers

  1. Round 1 · Pretotypes · 9 participantsProbed reactions to AI suggestions, one-click proposals and override controls; about 400 observational notes and four core themes.
  2. Round 2 · MLP prototype · 5 participantsAverage 9.5/10 likelihood to use.
  3. Round 3 · Usability on a live build · 7 participantsScores rose from 1.6 to 3.1 out of 4.
  4. Pilot · 37 sellers, US and LATAM · Nov 2025 – Feb 20269.5/10 satisfaction; 438 estimates, 109 quotes and 52 proposal decks in month one; 57% of pilot users adopted it.
  5. Global rollout · 697 North America users (Mar 2026) → 1,750 active globally (Jun 2026)13,126 quotes in nine weeks; Quick Quote overtook the legacy CPQ as the majority path (53.6% vs 46.4%) by the last week of May.

Pretotyping and Usability Validation

Validation ran across three distinct rounds, each testing a more finished version of the product against real user behaviour.

Round 1 — Early concept validation. Figma-based pretotypes with 9 participants, probing reactions to AI-generated suggestions, one-click proposal generation, and human-override controls, roughly 400 observational notes. Four core themes surfaced: Efficiency & Automation, Strategic Enablers, Customization, and Transparency & Control.

Round 2 — MLP validation. Prototype testing with 5 participants against the near-final feature set. Average rating: 9.5/10 on likelihood to use.

Round 3 — Usability testing. 1-on-1 sessions in a staged sandbox with 7 participants, evaluating a functional build, not a prototype, to ensure findings reflected real system behaviour. The baseline quoting experience scored 1.6 out of 4. Users described the legacy tool as slow, data-sparse, and built around “spiderweb reporting.” After engaging with Quick Quote, scores rose to 3.1 out of 4, with information consolidation into a single, intelligent view cited as the defining improvement.

Design exploration: multiple directions tested before committing to the final architecture

From Pilot to Global Rollout

The Pilot (Nov 2025 – Feb 2026). We released the Minimum Lovable Product, deliberately not an MVP; the bar was lovable, not merely viable, to 37 pilot participants across the US and LATAM. In one month, pilot users loaded 111 unique opportunities, created 438 estimates, converted 109 into quotes, and generated 52 automated proposal decks. Satisfaction averaged 9.5/10, 57% of pilot users actively adopted the tool, and the phase pressure-tested backend stability before wider release. One participant called the interface “pretty life changing.” Another, reflecting on the legacy system: “If I never have to see it again... I'm sold.”

Pilot adoption dashboard: 37 users, one month, accelerating engagement across every measure

Enablement as a Design Discipline. Rollout was designed, not announced. We partnered weekly with the Enablement team and, critically, championed pilot-phase AEs and CSAMs to tell their own story to the field, rather than the product team telling it for them. The field reaction told us it worked:

  • “I literally just made a quote in 5 seconds when historically I have put off that step until the last minute because it could easily take me 15 min.”
  • “Honestly the BEST update we had in our overall business process since I started this role.”
  • “Besides ramp contracts, curious why anyone would use Apttus instead of Quick Quote?”
Enablement & Roll Out: the field's reaction, unprompted, in Slack

Global Scale (Mar – Jun 2026). Quick Quote launched to 697 North America users in March 2026, announced at Sales Kick-off, then expanded to EMEA and APJ in April and LATAM in May, reaching 1,750 active global users. The telemetry validated the framework at enterprise scale:

North America launch, March 2026: the first proof the framework held at 20x pilot scale
  • 13,126 total quotes generated through Quick Quote (Apr 1 – Jun 3, 2026)
  • 71% of eligible on-time renewal quotes flowed through the new system
  • By the final week of May, Quick Quote overtook the legacy CPQ as the majority path, 53.6% vs. Apttus's 46.4%, inverted from 12.3% in week one
  • 67% of all human-generated quotes are now eligible for Quick Quote, with releases targeting 90%
The crossover: Quick Quote overtaking Apttus as the majority quoting path, week over week

Time-motion analysis projects 85,000+ annual hours saved, the equivalent of 82 FTEs added without a single hire, restoring two full weeks of productivity per rep per year (54 weeks of output in a 52-week year), with a projected $10–15M in incremental revenue from the same team.

Regional telemetry now drives the roadmap: higher adoption in Commercial vs. Enterprise matched expectations (higher volume, lower complexity), while APJ friction surfaced localization needs, pricing uplift handling, backdating, credit calculators, already in development. The rollout didn't end the research; it industrialized it.

06 — SCOPE OF INFLUENCE

What outlived the project: a framework, a paper and a research cadence

The work was peer-reviewed and published as “A Service-AI Framework for Human-Centered Design in Enterprise Sales: Orchestration, Execution, and Roll Out” (Deshpande & Li) in the proceedings of the 25th DMI: Academic Design Management Conference (opens in a new tab), hosted at Georgia Tech, Atlanta, August 11–12, 2026, in the Design for AI and Technology track, which Parag also co-chaired. The paper situates Quick Quote within human-automation theory (Parasuraman & Riley's misuse/disuse framework, Shneiderman's Human-Centered AI, distributed cognition) and formalizes the Service-AI framework as a replicable model for other high-stakes, document-heavy domains such as legal contracting and procurement.

Framework adopted

Service-AI became the blueprint engineering, RevOps and design built against, and a peer-reviewed paper at DMI ADMC 2026.

Teams aligned

Several teams across Sales, CSMs, RevOps, Deal Desk, Sales Ops, and Engineering agreed one blueprint.

Roadmap changed

Usage tracking, CAGR metrics and collaborative approvals came from the field, not the original plan. Five-plus research rounds with 52+ participants set a new cadence for internal tools.

Honestly the BEST update we had in our overall business process since I started this role.
Strategic AE
07 — REFLECTION

What I learned, and what I’d change

Learned

The workaround is the research finding. When sophisticated professionals build parallel systems in Google Sheets to bypass official tools, that's not user error. It's a signal that the official system has failed them. The workaround reveals what the product should have been. Starting there, instead of starting with the existing product, changes everything.

AI's job is to restore agency, not replace it. The most important design constraint in this project wasn't technical. It was philosophical. Every feature was evaluated against one question: does this give the human more control over the outcome, or less? Systems that answer “less” erode trust over time, regardless of their accuracy.

Explainability is a feature, not a footnote. The tooltip-to-explanation-card shift was a small design change that produced a significant behavioural change. Users don't resist AI recommendations because they distrust AI. They resist them because they can't defend them to a client. Make the reasoning visible, and the resistance disappears.

Lovable is a higher bar than viable, and worth it. The deliberate choice to target a Minimum Lovable Product shaped every prioritisation decision. The difference showed up in the 9.5/10 satisfaction score and in users describing the tool as “life changing.” Viability ships. Lovability gets evangelised.

Research continuity changes the product. The features users needed most (advanced usage tracking, CAGR metrics, collaborative approval workflows) weren't in the original roadmap. They emerged from the field. A design process that treats launch as the end of listening will always be building the wrong version of the thing.

Research rigor changes the organization, not just the product. Internal tools historically followed a rushed, engineering-first trajectory, two or three interviews, then build. This project ran five-plus rounds of research, 52+ participants, and over 2,000 minutes of interview time across the full lifecycle. The lasting artifact isn't only Quick Quote; it's a design culture where the field's voice reshapes the roadmap continuously. When users asked for CAGR metrics and usage tracking, those went back to the drawing board and shipped. That cadence is now the expectation, not the exception.

Deliverables

  • Six-phase Experience Architecture methodology
  • Contextual inquiry workshops (18 participants, 550+ observations)
  • Analysis of 350,000 historical opportunity records
  • Persona-led user journey maps (5 roles)
  • Service-AI Framework: Orchestration, Execution, Human Override
  • Design system assessment and Carbon adoption
  • Three-round validation study (9 + 5 + 7 participants)
  • Quick Quote MLP design and pilot rollout
  • AI transparency and explainability design system
  • Enablement & champion program with the field team
  • Phased global rollout (37 → 697 → 1,750 users)
  • Peer-reviewed publication, DMI ADMC 2026 (Design for AI and Technology track)

04 — CONTACT

Hiring a principal designer for complex, AI-heavy systems? Let’s talk.

© 2026 Parag DeshpandePrincipal Product Designer · UX Architect · Staff+ AI experience roles