Blending two cultural thinking styles is both easier and harder than it looks. On paper, it’s pretty clear how analytical and holistic design logic differ—once you dive into the research, it all makes sense. But actually designing for both without letting my own instincts get in the way? That was tough.

As someone who grew up Korean-American, I thought I’d naturally be able to bridge the gap. And to some extent, I could—but even then, I found myself leaning one way or the other without realizing it. That was a big realization: in future projects where this cultural overlap keeps showing up (and it will, in our global world), I’ll need to be even more intentional. It’s a double-edged sword—powerful, but tricky to wield without cutting too close to bias.

Unlike my previous case studies, this redesign wasn’t about inventing something entirely new—it was about refining what already existed. I’m used to creating fresh solutions for clear problems, but here, the challenge was to approach an existing system from multiple angles, informed by research and user feedback. It was a different process, and the outcome surprised me.

​

What I learned is that innovation doesn’t always mean novelty. A thoughtful, well-research

ed redesign can be just as impactful—especially when the goal is to make users feel heard. While I’d love to create something radically new, I now understand that too much change can feel alienating. Users are sensitive, even to small shifts, and success sometimes lies in striking the right balance between improvement and familiarity.