Case study · Dimark

Redesigning a maintenance app that service engineers chose themselves

DiMS is Dimark’s maintenance system for airport baggage-handling lines. I redesigned how service engineers report faults, plan their work and run line service, and built the design system behind it. When the team’s version and my prototype were tested side by side, the service engineers picked mine, and it went to production.

8–10 h

Before the redesign

One baggage-line service took a full working day.

~40%

Less time

As estimated by the service engineers who ran the service.

3

Service engineers

Involved from the first interview to the final test.

DiMS by Dimark – cover

Company

Dimark

Domain

Industrial B2B, airport baggage systems

Timeline

May 2022 – Jan 2024

My role

UI/UX designer, the only designer on the team

Team

Team leader, front-end and back-end developers, tester

Platform

Tablet and desktop (mobile designed)

01 · Context

Airports can’t wait for a fix

Dimark designs, installs and services baggage-handling systems for airports. When a line stops, bags stop and flights can be delayed, so maintenance runs under time pressure.

DiMS is the app service engineers use for this work: reporting faults, planning tasks and running scheduled service on the line. Over almost two years at Dimark, I worked on DiMS and on other apps in the same product family, including the SCADA monitoring system.

02 · Problem

Two needs, one tool

Business need

One consistent set of apps, faster delivery of new features, and accessibility good enough for markets with stricter requirements (WCAG).

User need

Service engineers didn’t know how to use some features, couldn’t easily go back a step, and struggled with small buttons and low contrast on the tablet.

The harder problem: the team and I understood the service process differently. Before drawing screens, we had to agree on how a line service actually runs.

03 · My role

The only designer on the team

I worked with a team leader, front-end and back-end developers and a tester.

What I did

UX/UI audit, interviews and tests with service engineers, process mapping, the design system, UI for the company’s apps, and handoff in Figma.

What I started

The audit as a starting point, accessibility (WCAG) as a team standard, and a design system built from scratch, all together with the team.

04 · Direction

Fix the foundation first with one design system. Then design the service process around how service engineers actually work on the line.

05 · Impact

What changed

For service engineers

Clear steps instead of guessing. A service that used to take 8–10 hours became, in their own estimate, about 40% shorter.

For developers

A documented design system, so new screens were built from existing parts instead of being designed from zero every time.

For the business

One consistent product family and a base ready for accessibility requirements.

The full story

How we got there

06 · Research

Talking to the people on the line

I worked with three service engineers and stayed in regular contact with them for the whole project. We talked face to face, next to the working app, in a place where testing was practical. I turned what they told me into Figma prototypes and tested clickable versions with them.

Mapping the process

Before designing screens, I mapped the full fault lifecycle in four flows: reporting a fault, defining it as a task, accepting the finished work, and the service report. Each flow started with a user story and a goal, and listed every decision point, required field and status.

Report

The service engineer picks the device by scanning a QR code, choosing it from a list or typing its name, then adds symptoms, priority, location (arrivals, departures, out-of-gauge) and a description.

Define

The manager turns the report into a task. Instructions, parts and tools for that device are attached automatically, and the task lands in the planner.

Confirm

The manager accepts the fix or sends it back. A rejected fix returns to the top of the list.

Statuses

Six statuses, each with its own colour: Undefined, Not planned, Planned, In progress, Done, Unsolved.

Fragment of the fault-reporting flow (text blurred, NDA)
Fragment of the task-definition flow (text blurred, NDA)

Fragments only. Because of the NDA, I can’t show the full process.

Insight → Action

No way back from a step

No way back from a step

→ A persistent back action on every step

Buttons too small for work in gloves

Buttons too small for work in gloves

→ Touch targets of at least 48 px, main actions at the bottom of the screen

Low contrast

Low contrast

→ A palette checked against WCAG AA

Every app looked different

Every app looked different

→ One design system for all of them

07 · The decision

Two versions of the service process

This was the hardest part of the project. I designed the whole line-service process, and the team and stakeholders rejected it. They had a different picture of how the service should run.

I didn’t push back. I built their version as asked, and kept developing mine separately as a clickable Figma prototype, without blocking the team.

The team’s version

Built first, the way the team and stakeholders asked for it.

My prototype

Clickable in Figma. The service engineers compared both and chose it, and it went to production.

When the team disagrees, let the people who do the work compare real options.

Constraints and what we left for later

Photos

Some airports don’t allow photos, so pictures of the device and location are optional, while a written description is always required.

Later

Editing and cancelling a reported fault, and showing a fault’s repair history when it’s defined again. We noted both as future features so the first version could ship.

08 · Solution

Before and after

Three screens a service engineer uses every day. Click a screen to enlarge it.

Login

Login

Before: a generic form on a gradient. After: a branded DiMS start screen with the language switch at the top.

Before

Login – before the redesign

After

Login – after the redesign

Fault report

Fault report

Before: a long form with dropdowns. After: tap-first tiles. Scan a QR code, pick the symptom and priority, add a photo.

Before

Fault report – before the redesign

After

Fault report – after the redesign

Planner

Planner

Before: coloured tiles with codes like MAL or OC01 and no context. After: a team timeline with task status, deadlines and a to-do list beside it.

Before

Planner – before the redesign

After

Planner – after the redesign

Names and logins on the screens are blurred.

09 · Outcomes

From outcome to impact

New fault-report flow

New fault-report flow

→ Faults are reported with the device, symptom, priority and photo in one place

Team planner

Team planner

→ Service engineers and managers see the same plan and task status

Design system

Design system

→ Developers build new screens from documented parts

See the design system →

Service engineers chose the new process

→ It went to production

10 · Learnings

What I’d keep doing

01

Start with an audit. It gives the team a shared list of problems instead of opinions.

02

When you disagree with the team, build both options and let users compare them.

03

Accessibility has to be explained, not just applied.

04

Test where the work happens, with the people who do it.

11 · More from Dimark

Other apps in the family

Besides DiMS, I designed for other apps in Dimark’s product family. If you’d like to know more, I’m happy to walk you through them in an interview.

Video monitoring – Dimark app

Video monitoring

BRS mobile app – Dimark

BRS mobile app

DiSCADA – Dimark app

DiSCADA

BRS on handheld scanners – Dimark app

BRS on handheld scanners

Contact

Complex product?
Let’s make it clear together.

Drop me an email:

Drop me an email:

Drop me an email:

Poznań

12:26 am

Wednesday, October 21 (GMT+2)

Reykjavik

10:26 pm

Tuesday, October 20 (GMT+0)

Washington

06:26 pm

Tuesday, October 20 (GMT-4)

Taipei City

06:26 am

Wednesday, October 21 (GMT+8)

Poznań

12:26 am

Wednesday, October 21 (GMT+2)

Reykjavik

10:26 pm

Tuesday, October 20 (GMT+0)

Washington

06:26 pm

Tuesday, October 20 (GMT-4)

Taipei City

06:26 am

Wednesday, October 21 (GMT+8)

© 2026 Marta Korza · Poznań, Poland · working worldwide

© 2026 Marta Korza · Poznań, Poland · working worldwide