W.G. Pringle IV

"I just plunged my first toilet"
is not something you want to hear your 8 year old say.

Scroll

pringle.design

wg@pringle.design

Hello all!

My name is W.G. and I am a designer who has had the awesome privilege of working with some great companies like Capital One, FireEye and NowSecure.

I’m a seasoned UX design professional with over a decade of experience in the field. Always keeping my skills sharp, I stay at the forefront of design tools and trends. A passionate early adopter of Figma, I’m driven by all elements of design: from crafting impactful design systems to refining seamless product workflows.

Work

Case Study
NowSecure - MASVS Report
Case Study
Spring - Homepage
Case Study
FireEye Endpoint - Audit Viewer

Contact

I can't thank you enough for stopping by and checking things out.

Please contact me if you have any questions.

Thanks again. WG

wg@pringle.design

All rights reserved. 2025

Spring from Capital One
No where to go but down?!
Role
Senior UX Designer
Challenge
Reduce an insane bounce rate and save the product

Overview

Spring from Capital One is a site dedicated to bringing discounts on goods and services to small businesses.

Spring is a free service but requires visitors to sign up and log in before a discount code or link is revealed. Existing Capital One customers by default have access to Spring as they can log in using their Capital One online credentials.

Given a site or application which compiles discounts isn't unique in itself, Spring is different in that a deals team at Capital One negotiates discounts which are often better than those found elsewhere.

The Problem

Spring's bounce rate for the homepage was an astronomical 97%. A bounce rate this high isn't even considered acceptable for blogs or news where users often go for one specific reason and leave.

Objectives

Give the current statistics we had our work cut out for us and we established the following objects.

  • Decrease the homepage bounce rate
  • Improve user comprehension
  • Establish a clear and intuitive next step

Spring soft launched in 2017 but it's formal national launch won't be in late 2020. What copy tells the user what the purpose of Spring is? Where are examples that would help reinforce the purpose? These are a few pain points that needed to be addressed.

The Process

The basic UX process could be thought of as research, ideation, design and testing however there are a multitude of facets to each, facets within facets and not every UX challenge is the same. A UX problem could require you to go through either a more expanded process or just the opposite, a trimmed down more focused process.

Audit

For Spring's homepage bounce rate problem the process started with a UX audit of the entire site. While this is certainly looking at more than the single page in question, I was new to Spring and I needed to understand the site as a whole to deliver relevant insights that could potentially be carried through out the application.

The UX audit provided a critique of the homepage, noting mistakes in UX best practices and lack of content to tell the user just what Spring has to offer but just as importantly it also provided key information by defining personas and customer journeys as well as evaluating competitors.

I conducted a complete audit of the Spring product when I first came on board, this helped to better understand the impact a change on one page might have through out the rest of the site.

Research

Our UX researcher and I ran a series of qualitative tests on the homepage to help gauge the users understanding of Spring. It's my belief that a visitor needs to be able to understand what the product has to offer in a concise and compelling way in order to get them to take they next step and drive adoption.

We found visitors were having a difficult time understanding the purpose of Spring. Above the fold there was only catchy and somewhat cryptic marketing blurbs which kept our marketing department happy but wasn't helping users. We followed our initial tests up with a series of bare bones comprehension tests which confirmed the copy of the page wasn't conveying the purpose of the product.

Further more, the main call to action was cryptic as the button label didn't tell the user where they would be taken to. Combining these elements it was easy to empathize with the user's being confused.

Ideation

Sketching

I love the immediacy of sketching, not relying on anything digital, this is truly freeing and can allow ideas to flow fast. Sketching can often involve quite a bit of iterations, again because your not held back by a digital platform. The eraser or a new sheet of paper can be a powerful friend in these situations.

These are only a few sketches for demonstration purposes however it is not unusual to do 2, 3, 4, 5x as many.

Wireframes

We distilled several options down to the 2D, architectural type, representations of the design. I found the main benefit here is allowing the stakeholders to focus on the content and flow. There are no color distractions to get people off topic. After reviewing these it was easy to determine the next step we wanted to take and validate.

Wireframes serve a vital purpose, the focus from stakeholder and feedback you receive is often extremely helpful.

Design

The mockups I created were done in Figma which allowed me to use the official Capital One design library known as 'Gravity' for basic elements and responsive grids. It was also necessary for us to establish our own separate design library for our product which has UI elements specific to our product. We wanted the product to align with it's siblings yet be distinctive in certain visual treatments and micro interactions.

Using what we learned in the research phase we updated existing and added additional copy to tell the user clearly and directly what Spring has to offer. The call to action, inline with the new copy, had a clear label letting the user know what the next step is.

Aligning to the corporate design system allowed us to leverage the trust that has already been built there by the corporate brand.

High fidelity mockups are reviewed and critiqued by the product experience group yielding additional insights and ideas.

Conclusion

Test, test, then test some more. While we were able to make significant improvements to the bounce rate iterating and A/B testing continues. As a designer once I start working on a problem it is hard to let go and for this project I will continue discovering and testing. It's my belief that data driven design is highly effective and addictive which is the stage we are now in.

This interaction shows the user going from the homepage to the merchant offer.

Endpoint from FireEye
More capable, insightful, intuitive ... more is good
Role
Senior UX Designer
Challenge
Re-design Endpoint Triage Summary to give analysts new super powers

Overview

HX or Endpoint as it is more commonly know from FireEye is a product that monitors computers or hosts as they are known for signs of cyber attacks. Each host has an agent installed that monitors different types of events and saves them for review.

The Endpoint workflow allows security operation centers(SOC) to confirm threats, isolate affected hosts and to examine a host to determine the exact nature of a threat which could be either an automated attack or a human threat actor.

When the agent alerts to a possible compromise a triage package is created logging events that occurred before, during and after the compromise.

The Problem

When an alert occurs time is of the essence. Analysts need to know what happened and when. Who was involved, was it a sponsored threat group, was the attack a success and how wide spread. The Endpoint application at the time involved a lot of clicks to find essential pieces of information. The user would often have to leave the investigation to go to other parts of the application to preform queries or leave the application altogether to find essential information in another application. In short, it was taking analysts to long to conduct an investigation and the process was cumbersome.

Objectives

We needed to keep the analyst in the context of the investigation as much as possible. In doing so several pain points needed to be addressed.

  • Reduce the amount of time it takes to determine if an attack was successful along with the attack methodology.
  • Eliminate or reduce the need to leave the product.
  • Give them more information and a way directly act on it.

Viewing an alert Triage Summary was game changing when first introduced but as the sophistication of attackers grew the tools to fight them needed to evolve.

The Process

A typical simplified UX process could be thought of as research, ideation, design and testing.

To put a visual to the process we can see that there can be multiple revisions in the ideation, design and test part of the process.

Research

The Triage Summary is intented for a select group of analysts who have very specialized knowledge in cyber security. When conducting research for the Triage Summary we needed to interview these analysts to determine pain points and their needs.

As luck would have it the work on the Triage Summary coincided with FireEye's annual Cyber Defense Summit gathering and it allowed us to have access to a great number of analysts.

In viewing a Triage Summary analysts have by in large similar goals...

  • Confirm if an attack was successful.
  • Confirm if there was command and control activity.
  • Determine if an attack was automatted or done by a human.
  • Determine if there is any exfiltration of data.
  • Determine how many hosts may have been involved.

The primary pain point which was most often repeated is that it takes to long to determine is an attack was successful. And the primary culprit is the fact the analyst needs to leave the product to get additional insights around a piece of intel most commonly ip addresses or domain names. Other contributing factors include the lack of context around the host they are viewing the triage summary. Where is is, what is the OS, etc. Then the processes in the triage summary have parent child relations bust aren't displayed as such. Finally looking at the swimlanes of events is it possible to simplify this information.

Ideation

Sketching

Analysts can gather a great deal of insight from the Triage Summary timeline of events so exploring the way it was visualized and it's capabilities or lack there of was a starting point.

One of the pain points we gathered from the anaylyst was that the existing swim lanes of events was limiting and they wanted to see a more intuitive represntaion in a liniear singular timeline. With this approach we could add inline contextual information that would again make it more useful.

The list of processes in the Triage Summary wasn't intuitive in that they are parent, child and sibling relationships which in best practive should be reprsented in a tree fashion.

Wireframes

Knowing the new visualizations we wanted to introduce we explored refining the layout of the Triage Summary one of which would flip the content around in orientaiton entirely. This allowed for a side by side exploration of events which made syncing the information in the graph and detail in the tables much easier.

We explored using the existing layout to reduce development time however after wireframing different options and realizing a clear direction in which to proceed.

We also wireframed the contextual popups, exploring various layouts, as these would be key in keeping the analysts in Endpoint without needing to leave and get these insights from other tools.

Design

The final design ended up with numerous enhancements to give our analyst a more thourough examination of a potential attack.

We made the UI more intuitive by...

  • Reworking the outlying processes into a tree versus a list of text and labels.
  • In the graph we added appropriate iconography for the type of event. These visual allow for better recognition of events.
  • Through the use of a single timeline we match the way an analyst is thinking of the attack chain.
  • We made proper use of color to easily identify clickable elements and next steps as well as critical information.
  • We added a link back to where the user came from reinforcing the notion that the application has nearly all the necessary tools for a complete investigation and remediation.

We made the Triage summary more insightful by...

  • Providing contextual information on the host from which the triage came.
  • We added contextual information into the graphical view of events along with appropriate icnongraphy.
  • We now have popups for deeper insights into event providing a host of information including the attacker and the attak employed.

We made the triage summary more capable by...

  • We added the global capability to run a search for other hosts in the environment that have similar events. This prepopulates the query with much of the desired facets for need to determine the extend of the attack.
  • We embedded the capability to make notes on what the anaylst has observed and the abilty to share with other in the organization.
  • We added a rich popup with additional insights of an event. The popup also has the capability to run a queries with essential informaiton prepopulated.

High fidelity mockups were created and reviewed by the design staff and the analysts that assisted in the research.

Mockup for the contextual modal with additional insights. These insights can be anything from an exicutible to an IP used by a know threat actor.

Conclusion

The Triage Summary is only a small part of the entire Endpoint application but it might be the most critical area in that it allows our analysts to determine if an attack was successful, who did it, what did they do, did they exfiltrate any sensitive information, how wide spread the potential damage was and the ability to stop the attack.

Previously our anaylyst were cobbling together information from a variety of sources and now they have a more complete way of viewing and dealing with an alert.

With our improvements the product is more capable while saving valuable time. Ultimately this effort has allowed our customers to better protect themselves in an increasingly dangerous online world.

Here you can see the user clicking on an event in the timeline to get additional insight.

Metricly
2 + 2 = Awesome
Role
Senior UX Designer
Challenge
Design computed metrics UI/UX

Overview

Metricly provides analytics that allow organizations to proactively address performance issues across applications and IT infrastructure.

While I was with Metricly we pivoted from being an on-premise software solution to a cloud based SaaS application.

Rebuilding our product from scratch, I not only did the design for the entire product but also drove the adoption of supported CSS frameworks and created a comprehensive design system.

The Problem

Our user were creating dashboards however, when using just the metrics provided by AWS, the dashboards quickly became large and required a great deal of experirise to intrepret.

We needed to make the dashboard experience simple and straight foward but to do this we first needed to add the 'computed metric' feature.

Objectives

Add a computed metric feature to the product. Creating a computed metric should be easy and intuitive yet powerful with a wide range of options.

  • Allow users to create a 'computed metric' where two or more metrics can be computed in any number of ways.
  • The interaction experience for creating a computed metrics should be quick when appicable and the method for doing so should be intutitve.
  • Users should be able to use computed metrics across the application. They are for dashboards, policies as wells as reports.

Simple computed metric formula examples that could be beneficial to a devop environment.

The Process

The basic UX process could be thought of as research, ideation, design and testing however there are a multitude of facets to each, facets within facets and not every UX challenge is the same. A UX problem could require you to go through either a more expanded process or just the opposite, a trimmed down more focused process.

Research

As many large customers had been asking for computed metrics and it was quickly moved to the top of the backlog of features to implement.

I did some research around computed or calculated metrics to make sure I firmly grasped the the concept. I also did some cometitive analysis where other had similar features.A great many examples that proved to be helpful were computed metrics for Google Analytics.

I worked with our in house subject matter experts(SMEs) to determine the bare essentials of the computed metric feature. How will they be created? How will they be tested and how will they be ultimatley used.

Survey

Along with interviewing the SMEs I also created a survey for them to take to help stack rank the importantance of computed metrics and their potential uses.

Sampling of computed metrics survey results.

Ideation

Sketching

My approach to the design process usually has quiet a bit of sketching involved. After my research I wanted to build on the experience where the user could not only create the computed metric but also test it. Additional settings which occupied their own separate tab were also seen as having the ability to be further developed over time.

Wireframes

The wireframing stage brough the task into better focus and allowed me to explore with very little cost the different varying amounts of data that can be involved.

Design & Conclusion

Defining and testing a computed metric following by saving allows it to be used in dashboard widgets, policies that affect alerting and reports.

By adding computed metrics to Metricly we saved users hours of potential eyeball calculations fraught with the potential for costly mistkaes.

Computed Metric Editor

Computed Metric Editor

Computed Metric Editor

NowSecure
IYKYK
If You Know,
You Know
Role
Principal UX Designer
Challenge
Design MASVS Report

Background and Context

NowSecure is a mobile security platform that helps organizations detect and remediate critical vulnerabilities in their applications. During a major product overhaul—undertaken to address years of technical debt—we introduced MASVS (Mobile Application Security Verification Standard) compliance testing as a core feature. This standard, recognized widely in the mobile security community, allows teams to benchmark their apps and ensure they meet best practices for security and privacy.

At the time of this project, I worked closely with teams across the organization—from the CEO and product owners to sales engineers, developers, and project managers—to rebuild the entire product. Part of this rebuild involved establishing a comprehensive design methodology in Figma, creating a scalable design system to support rapid iteration and consistent UI patterns.

Goals

  1. Ensuring comprehensive security compliance for mobile applications.
  2. Providing clear, actionable insights into security vulnerabilities.
  3. Building trust with users by demonstrating rigorous security standards.

My Role and Team Structure

  • Lead Product Designer (Me): Responsible for user research, UX/UI design, and co-creation of the Figma design system.
  • Product Owner (Ed): Oversaw feature prioritization and stakeholder alignment.
  • Sales Engineer (Brad): Provided insights into customer pain points and fielded incoming requests from prospective clients.
  • Developers (Jack & Edwin): Responsible for front-end and back-end development, including the security scanning engine.
  • CEO (Alan): Offered high-level strategic direction and approval.

Because of the technical debt we were addressing, the team was lean and often required each of us to “wear multiple hats,” from ideation to implementation.

Design Process

Phase 1: Laying the Foundations

(Weeks 1–2)

During Weeks 1–2, our goal was to lay the foundational work for integrating MASVS data into our product. We needed to define clear requirements, align the design with engineering capabilities, and deliver an MVP that demonstrated value to both existing customers and prospects—all while ensuring the solution was user-centric and scalable.

The primary objectives were to:

  • Establish comprehensive requirements through stakeholder engagement.
  • Collaborate with engineering to design a system capable of processing and presenting MASVS data effectively.
  • Develop an MVP with a clear, actionable interface that met both high-level and detailed needs for compliance reporting.

Step 1: Setting Requirements

  • Stakeholder Engagement Conducted interviews with key stakeholders and worked closely with a team member involved in the MASVS standard to understand the testing scope and user expectations.
  • Defining Key Requirements:
    • Provide a high-level compliance overview for each MASVS category.
    • Offer a drill-down into specific issues, linking to official MASVS documentation or suggested fixes.
    • Ensure the design can handle diverse app portfolios, from small to large enterprises.

Design Research

  • Internal subject matter extpers (CEO, Product Owner, Sales Engineers)
  • Competitive Analysis
  • Learning about MASVS

Step 2: Designing the System with Engineering

  • Collaboration with Engineering Worked concurrently with the engineering team to revisit and refine our system architecture, ensuring:
    • Scalability The system could handle large scans and store historical compliance data.
    • Data Security Maintaining strong encryption and access controls, vital for a security product.
    • Design Consistency Leveraging components from our newly established Figma design system.

Core MASVS Integration Sequence Diagram

Step 3: Creating MVP Launch Design Specs

  • MASVS Report Overview A single-page summary displaying each MASVS category.
  • Detail Test Case Provide the testing results for each control group test case.
  • Control Detail Explanations of the group provided in tooltips.

Outcome & Impact

  • Clear Direction The stakeholder interviews and collaboration provided a clear, user-centric set of requirements, establishing a solid foundation for the product.
  • Technical Readiness By partnering with engineering, we built a scalable, secure system that was fully capable of handling the nuances of MASVS data.
  • Effective MVP The MVP successfully delivered a concise compliance overview. This allowed us to rapidly iterate based on user feedback and further enhance the product in subsequent phases.

This structured foundation was critical in ensuring that our product was both functional and user-friendly from the outset.

Initial concise MVP

Phase 2: Launching for Alpha Users

(Weeks 3–4)

In Weeks 3–4 of our project, we initiated an internal “Alpha” launch targeting select enterprise clients and internal security teams. Our goal was to gather early, actionable feedback to ensure our design met diverse user needs before a wider release.

Our objectives were to validate and refine our design by:

  • Identifying usability challenges.
  • Understanding the distinct needs of executive users versus developers.
  • Pinpointing opportunities to enhance in-product guidance.

Step 1: Extracting Feedback from Alpha Users

Over a two-week period, we:

  • Conducted short, structured video call sessions.
  • Distributed detailed surveys to capture user impressions.

Key Insights Discovered:

  • Understanding Standards Users found MASVS jargon intimidating and requested plain-language explanations for each category.
  • Executive vs. Developer Views While executives desired a simplified success/failure rating, developers needed in-depth insights with code-level guidance.
  • Guidance Users preferred immediate, actionable suggestions for fixing issues rather than being directed to extensive documentation.

Step 2: Creating Beta Launch Specs

Based on the Alpha feedback, we redesigned the user experience for the Beta release by:

  • Implementing Tiered Explanations
    • Executive Summary A high-level pass/fail status for each MASVS group.
    • Control Detail Summarized test detail for each group with drill-down functionality to selectively expose more detail.
  • Inline Education Inline explainations of the various groups of controls that represent the most critical areas of the mobile attack surface.

Beta design with drill down functionality

Outcome & Impact

By systematically gathering and acting on early user feedback, we were able to:

  • Validate the effectiveness of our initial design.
  • Tailor the product experience to meet the specific needs of both executive and technical users.
  • Develop a Beta version with drill-down functionality that significantly improved clarity and user guidance.

This structured approach not only enhanced the product’s usability but also built a solid foundation for wider adoption in subsequent launches.

Phase 3: Iterating Post-Launch

(Weeks 5–6)

In Weeks 5–6, after the initial launch, we observed that our main compliance dashboard, while rich in information, was overwhelming for new users. The layout—with multiple color-coded sections and dense text—made it difficult for users to quickly identify which vulnerabilities required immediate attention. Additionally, the “risk level” indicators sometimes conflicted with the MASVS categories, leading to further confusion.

Our goal was to iterate on the dashboard design to improve usability by:

  • Simplifying the presentation of data.
  • Ensuring critical vulnerabilities were easily identifiable.
  • Creating a more intuitive layout that catered to both executives and developers.

Step 1: Narrowing Down Dashboard Design Criteria

  • Assessment Conducted a detailed review of user interactions and feedback which revealed that users were scanning the page too quickly and often missing critical vulnerabilities.
  • Key Issues Identified
    • Overwhelming amount of information.
    • Conflicting indicators between risk levels and MASVS categories.

Workflow from landing to findings

Step 2: Exploring Potential Solutions

  • Brainstorming Ideas Evaluated several approaches to streamline the dashboard
    • Highest Risk Items A design that places the most critical vulnerabilities at the top, while lower-risk findings remain in a collapsible section.
    • Contextual Summaries A “Top 3 Actions” box in the top banner to highlight urgent steps.
    • Layout An executive-level snapshot on the main screen with deeper, developer-focused details accessible via a secondary tab.
  • Key Questions Considered
    • Could a single compliance score simplify user interpretation?
    • Would a step-by-step wizard for critical vulnerabilities improve clarity?

Responsive designs, from 'mega' to mobile

Step 3: Design Review and Implementing Changes

  • Collaborative Discussion After team discussions and evaluating all options, we combined the most promising ideas into a unified redesign.
  • Final Implementation
    • Simplified Compliance ScoreIntroduced a concise message (e.g., “Your app meets 70% of MASVS requirements”) that provided an immediate overall status.
    • Prioritized Vulnerabilities Displayed a prioritized list of critical vulnerabilities at the top of the dashboard, with an option to expand for additional details.

Outcome & Impact

  • Improved Focus The redesign ensured that users could immediately see the most urgent issues, reducing information overload.
  • Enhanced User Confidence Feedback from beta users indicated they felt more confident and informed when interpreting MASVS results.
  • Faster Adoption The simplified view and prioritized action items contributed to a smoother onboarding experience and quicker decision-making.

This iterative process allowed us to refine the dashboard, making it more user-centric and effective in highlighting critical vulnerabilities post-launch.

Phase 4: Distributing Our Product

(Weeks 6+)

Following the successful Beta and subsequent refinements, we launched the MASVS compliance feature to all existing NowSecure customers. We also collaborated with our sales engineers to demonstrate the new functionality in product demos, emphasizing:

  • Ease of Understanding: A single compliance score and a short bullet list of top issues.
  • Value Proposition: Actionable solutions that help teams quickly remedy vulnerabilities.
  • Differentiation: Positioning NowSecure as a thought leader by aligning with recognized security standards like MASVS.

During this phase, we also continued to expand our Figma design system to support new features—like automated compliance alerts and advanced reporting.

Results and Learnings

Quantitative Achievements

  • 80% Adoption among existing enterprise customers within 3 months of launch.
  • 200+ Apps scanned through the MASVS module in the first quarter.
  • 40% Faster design turnaround time due to the new Figma-based design system.

Conclusion

By integrating MASVS compliance into NowSecure’s platform, we significantly improved user understanding of security standards and offered actionable insights for remediation. The simplified UI and tiered explanations built trust with both executive stakeholders and technical teams, allowing them to see immediate value in adopting the standard. This project not only enhanced the product’s competitive edge but also laid a strong design foundation for future features and improvements.

Final design fully collapsed

Final design with section expanded

Personal Learnings

  • Deep Subject Matter Expertise: Partnering with an MASVS contributor early on helped us craft a more accurate and credible solution.
  • Balancing Detail with Simplicity: Complex security topics can be overwhelming. Layering information (executive vs. developer views) was key to satisfying diverse user needs.
  • Importance of a Unified Design System: Building and maintaining a Figma-based design system saved us from repeated UI alignment issues and sped up iteration.
  • Collaborative Feedback Loop: Frequent usability tests and close cooperation with engineering ensured we caught confusion points early, refining the product to meet real user needs.

The different states of the reports including the Findings tab

Thank you for reading!