Aon / Enterprise Product Design
Certificate Center.
Bringing insurance certificate workflows into one digital experience.
- The Product
- A digital service where clients request and retrieve certificates of insurance, while specialists prepare and review requests.
- My Role
- Lead Designer — responsible for the UX/UI, page structure, interactions and functional experience.
This case focuses on the Service Request workspace, including certificate preparation, source comparison and specialist review.
Understanding the work.
Five field colleagues took part in individually moderated, 60-minute sessions in July 2024. Their feedback on the earlier COI Center experience surfaced questions, everyday tasks and unmet needs.
Research by Aon Consumer Experience & Design. These notes summarize the findings; they are not participant quotes or validation of the later Service Request redesign.
Questions
Who receives an escalation or coverage request?
Testing · Slides 14, 20–22Can a pending request be edited?
Testing · Slides 14, 20–22How do supporting documents carry over at renewal?
Testing · Slides 14, 20–22
Current workflow
Handle requests through email and manual steps.
Interviews · Slide 6Search past certificates, renewal records and attachments.
Interviews · Slide 6Coordinate information between account executives and ACS.
Interviews · Slide 6
Needs
Add named insureds and holders that are not in the system.
Testing · Slides 9, 17–19Support client-specific wording and less common coverages.
Testing · Slides 17–19Make the Certificate Library and dashboard labels easier to find and understand.
Testing · Slides 9, 11, 14
Pain points
Manual corrections and confusing email-format requirements.
Interviews · Slide 6Spelling errors in the Description of Operations.
Interviews · Slide 6Scattered records and large attachment sets make retrieval difficult.
Interviews · Slide 6
Read the detailed findings and source context
In July 2024, Aon’s Consumer Experience & Design team conducted five individually moderated, 60-minute sessions with field colleagues. These findings concern the earlier COI Center experience; they are not validation results for this Service Request redesign.
Manual work and email created room for mistakes.
Request processes varied by client and relied heavily on email and manual handling. Participants described corrections, confusing email-format requirements and spelling errors in the Description of Operations.
Interview findings · Slide 6Historical certificates were difficult to retrieve.
Participants reported a lack of centralized, searchable certificate storage and shared information between account executives and ACS contacts. Missing renewal records and large sets of attachments made it harder to find what had been issued before.
Interview findings · Slide 6The request flow needed to accommodate exceptions.
Participants wanted to add named insureds and certificate holders that were not already in the system. They also raised unique client wording, less common coverages and, in one case, multiple auto liability policies.
Acceptance testing · Slides 9, 17–19Handoffs and request states needed clearer explanations.
Questions included who would receive an escalation or coverage request, how supporting documents would carry over at renewal, and whether a pending request could be edited. These are distinct information and workflow needs, rather than evidence that every request should be editable.
Acceptance testing · Slides 14, 20–22Important information needed to be easier to find.
Participants wanted the Certificate Library higher in the interface and needed clarification of dashboard labels. The research deck records the library order change and dashboard tooltips as fixed.
Acceptance testing · Slides 9, 11, 14Source: COI Center Acceptance Testing — Field Colleagues, July 2024. Research conducted by Aon Consumer Experience & Design.
The specialist’s task.
Users reported that parts of the workflow took too long. AI document ingestion also faced training and confidence limitations, so specialists needed a practical way to inspect the information used to prepare a certificate.
One request can include several certificates, each with its own holder, coverage and delivery details. The selected certificate and the origin of its information need to stay clear.
From information to review.
I developed an alternative Service Request proposal within one week for product and engineering review. Three decisions connect preparation to the finished document.
- Organize the request.
- Separate request-level context from the fields for each certificate.
- Make information traceable.
- Distinguish reviewed values from their sources and keep supporting material accessible.
- Support a complete review.
- Connect field preparation to the draft certificate the specialist needs to check.
Prepare a certificate.
A Service Request can contain multiple certificates. The request identifier stays at the top, while certificate tabs give each holder a distinct workspace. Holder details, the named insured and preparation fields belong to the selected certificate.
Enlarge design reference
Compare the values.
Coverage information is presented across separate columns for the reviewed value, the system record, email and contract. Keeping those sources visible helps specialists see where the information comes from instead of treating every extracted value as already verified.
Enlarge design reference
Inspect the source.
View Source opens the supporting document alongside the preparation context. Tabs switch between source materials, while zoom and full-screen controls support closer inspection. Specialists can check the evidence without losing track of the certificate they are preparing.
Enlarge design reference
Preview the draft.
The draft preview brings the prepared information into the certificate format. Page thumbnails and document controls support a final visual check before the specialist continues with the request.
Enlarge design reference
A connected workspace.
The proposal connects request organization, source comparison, document inspection and draft preview. Product and engineering can review how requests, certificates and source information fit together.
Design delivery & next steps.
The one-week response established the proposal direction. The screens shown here come from later design iterations, including the handoff page labeled Service Request New Iteration 02/17/2026; they are not a verified snapshot of that week’s deliverable.
Certificate Center is live. This redesign’s release status and impact on completion time remain unconfirmed.
The next validation would be to observe specialists preparing a multi-certificate request: can they identify the right certificate, resolve conflicting values and complete the review without losing context?
Explore the complete design