▣
01
Archive over shortlist
Every documented project stays searchable instead of being reduced to a fixed "best 3–5."
Portfolio System
Designing for Recruiters
This portfolio was designed like a product, not a marketing site, starting from research into how recruiters actually evaluate design work. Recruiter-first information architecture, capability-based filtering, and job-description-aware search all answer one question fast: is this designer qualified?
UXRRedesignOperational WorkflowsMobile
Problem to Solve
Most portfolios are built as marketing sites: optimized for showing off, not for how a recruiter or hiring manager actually evaluates work under real time pressure.
This project started with a question instead of a template: what does a recruiter actually scan for in the first thirty seconds, and what would a portfolio look like if it were designed as a product around that answer, rather than assumed?
Solution Overview
A recruiter-first information architecture built around fast qualification signals: capability-based filtering, structured project metadata, and search designed to understand job-description language, not just literal keyword matches.
Every piece of it, including this project detail page, is a custom Framer code component, hand-built rather than assembled from templates, so the interaction patterns could be tuned specifically for fast evaluation.
THE ARCHIVE HYPOTHESIS
Relevance changes with the opportunity.
A senior designer’s portfolio should make the full range of their documented experience discoverable while helping each visitor isolate the evidence relevant to them.
A fixed shortlist asks the designer to predict every future hiring need. That can hide credible experience simply because it is older, narrower, or outside the designer’s most recent role. This portfolio keeps that evidence available, then uses search, capability filters, descriptions, and reading-depth signals to make a large archive usable.
Key decisions
⊞
02
Category-first browsing
Filters are organized by capability and medium so a specific ask can resolve before someone reads a case study.
◇
03
Two depths, not three
Skim and Deep Dive remain on the same page. A planned middle tier was removed when its meaning overlapped with both.
⌕
04
Search as a first-class tool
Search indexes what was built inside each project, not only project titles and company names.
THE CENTRAL TRADEOFF
Breadth vs. first impression
A large archive makes narrow experience discoverable, but it can also make every project appear equally important. The mitigation is hierarchy: preserve the breadth while controlling how much of it each reader encounters.
Mitigations
Filters
Search
Depth
Hierarchy
Design Challenges
What I need to learn
The live research evaluates whether the archive converts breadth into relevant, credible evidence.
01
Can a narrow need find relevant proof?
Test whether someone hiring for a specific capability can locate credible evidence without reading the entire archive.
02
Does the archive expand perceived fit?
Learn whether visitors consider me for a broader and more accurate range of work than my recent projects alone suggest.
03
Are reading commitments clear?
See whether visitors can distinguish quick proof from the projects that offer a deeper case study.
04
Do my strongest patterns stay legible?
Preserve breadth without making the work feel undifferentiated or obscuring what I am especially strong at.
Measurement plan
What Framer can measure
○Entry points and navigation paths
○Filter and search activation
○Skim and Deep Dive selection
○Time to the first project opened
○Project views and session duration
What needs human research
○Whether the homepage clears the recruiter gate
○Whether breadth reads as range or noise
○Whether a project actually answered the visitor’s need
○Why someone abandoned a path
○How confident someone feels in the work
Research plan
0
Define questions
Separate behavioral, perceptual, and evaluative questions.
1
First impression
Test role, level, and clarity after ten seconds.
2
Recruiter tasks
Ask recruiters to find evidence for one realistic need.
3
Live behavior
Use private analytics to evaluate real discovery paths.
What I’m measuring
Signals are collected privately and used to improve the experience.
▽
Filter usage
Which capabilities visitors use to narrow the archive.
⌕
Search usage
Which needs cannot be resolved through filters alone.
◇
Reading depth
How often visitors remain in Skim or open Deep Dive.
◷
Time to first project
How quickly someone moves from the homepage into the work.
◴
Portfolio session length
How long visitors spend exploring overall.
↘
Friction and drop-off
Where visitors abandon a path or interact without progressing.
▢
RESEARCH IN PROGRESS
This portfolio is part of the research.
I’m studying how recruiters, hiring managers, and design teams find evidence in a large portfolio. If you’ve explored the site, I’d love 30 seconds of feedback.
Anonymous unless you choose to leave your email.