AppMarket Fintech Experience Redesign

AppMarket is Fiserv’s marketplace for financial-technology products, services, and integrations. During my UX Design internship I explored how its fintech experience could evolve as the catalog grows to include more platforms, products, plans, add-ons, and purchasing paths.

Banking Hub remained the most mature platform experience, so the design question was not “how do we redesign one flow” but how AppMarket could support discovery, evaluation, configuration, pricing visibility, and onboarding preparation across a broader ecosystem.

The work resulted in a future-state direction covering marketplace information architecture, product-family organization, plan comparison, guided configuration, dependency and ownership states, persistent selection visibility, checkout, agreement signing, and dashboard ownership views, delivered as a fully working interactive Figma prototype with three complete customer scenarios.

Today, discovery happens inside a Banking Hub-centered context: clients arrive already connected to one platform and browse products that connect back to it. That structure works for the current ecosystem, but it behaves less like a marketplace and more like a platform extension catalog. As additional platforms, product families, and plan-based offerings enter the catalog, there is no higher-level structure for them to live in.

The offerings themselves are also interdependent. Plans, products, services, integration keys, and add-ons rarely stand alone, they are included, required, optional, or tied to a platform. Pricing compounds that complexity: base plans, included features, optional additions, recurring costs, and service costs all change the total. Shown too late, pricing feels like a surprise. Shown all at once, it overwhelms.

The brief was genuinely ambiguous. It could have become a product-detail redesign, a plan-comparison feature, a pricing model, a checkout flow, or an IA project. Defining which problem was worth solving became a real part of the work.

I worked most closely with my design mentor, who had been AppMarket’s only designer before I joined. I reported to Klaus, my manager and the Head of Design. I collaborated with product managers throughout, and other designers, researchers, and cross-functional stakeholders reviewed the work and gave feedback during the project.

The work was shaped by a recurring review cadence rather than by solo production. I had daily design reviews with my mentor, design reviews with Klaus twice each week, and weekly design presentations, critique sessions, and feedback discussions with my product manager and my mentor. I used those recurring reviews to test assumptions, compare design directions, refine the information architecture, improve hierarchy, clarify pricing and dependencies, and strengthen the prototype.

At the end of the internship I presented the completed multi-scenario prototype to the full product team and separately to the UX team. That final presentation walked through the future-state structure, the key design decisions, the three prototype scenarios, the scalability direction, and the remaining future considerations.

I owned the exploration presented here, including the IA proposals, configuration models, pricing-visibility patterns, and the interactive prototype, but the direction was shaped collaboratively. I was not the sole designer on AppMarket.

Instead of treating AppMarket as a Banking Hub-adjacent catalog, the future-state direction introduces a marketplace layer above the platforms. Banking Hub keeps its depth and importance, but it becomes one platform inside a structure that can absorb others without reorganizing the whole experience.

This reframing changed what the rest of the project could do. Product relationships, ownership states, and cross-sell opportunities became properties of the architecture rather than one-off treatments inside individual screens.

Progressive configuration kept exploration and decision-making in one continuous space, but it only works if the user can always see what they have chosen and what it costs. That led to a persistent selections summary holding the plan, selected products and services, dependencies, and a running cost breakdown.

Pricing visibility was designed as a progression rather than a single reveal: indicative pricing during discovery, structured comparison at the plan level, and itemized recurring and service costs during configuration. Dependencies use the same logic: required, included, and optional items are labeled where a decision is being made, not buried in detail pages.

Cross-selling was treated as a consequence of clear relationships. When the structure explains what pairs with what, relevant additions can be surfaced without turning the flow into a sales pitch.

The hardest challenge was scope. With no single obvious answer, I had to define the problem, defend a structural direction, and repeatedly revise it as I learned more about product dependencies and platform constraints.

The final deliverable was a fully working, interactive Figma prototype covering three complete customer scenarios end to end. Each scenario runs from entry through configuration, cart, checkout, billing information, agreement signing, order placement, and arrival on the dashboard. Together they demonstrate how AppMarket could support a customer from a first Banking Hub purchase, through returning-customer expansion, and into broader multi-platform growth.

The exploration concluded with a documented information architecture, a progressive configuration model, a pricing-visibility approach, dependency and ownership patterns, a continuous checkout and agreement path, dashboard ownership views, and design-system-aligned concepts handed to the AppMarket team for continued evaluation.

This work was not launched. It is a future-state direction, and no performance metrics or shipped outcomes are claimed.

This project taught me how to design through ambiguity. There was no defined brief, so the first real contribution was moving from individual screens to system-level information architecture and taking a position on what problem was worth solving.

Balancing user clarity against product strategy was the constant tension. I learned how much pricing, dependencies, ownership states, and platform relationships shape an experience, and how quickly a structure breaks when those relationships are not made explicit.

Figma Make accelerated my early exploration, but the work that mattered was manually transforming generated concepts into a cohesive, connected Figma prototype. Daily reviews with my mentor, twice-weekly reviews with Klaus, and weekly critique with my product manager taught me to defend a direction, absorb feedback quickly, and revise in public. Collaborating with my mentor, Klaus, product managers, designers, researchers, and other stakeholders shaped every version of the direction.

Most of all, presenting the final prototype to both the full product team and the UX team showed me how a working prototype can communicate a future-state product strategy far more convincingly than a deck of static screens.