DevOps User Experience

Oracle Fusion Applications as a Service (FAaaS) DevOps features a deeply nested navigation that forces operators, SMEs, COEs, and engineers through excessive clicks and tab switching to access management and maintenance data.

Business goal:

Oracle’s support teams were juggling multiple applications and control panels to manage customer Fusion environments, leading to inefficiency and increased risk of errors. The goal was to consolidate these disparate systems into a unified platform for better data visibility and reduced operational mistakes.

Design goal:

Redesign the information hierarchy to eliminate deep navigation by introducing natural language search, dynamically generating inquiry data, and leveraging existing design patterns—enabling users to access routine operational tasks with minimal clicks rather than hunting through multiple levels.

Problem:

The challenge wasn’t just improving the current DevOps interface—it was defining what the future AI-enhanced platform should look like. With years of accumulated redundancy and multi-level navigation, plus ongoing service additions, we needed to visualize the target experience before planning the transition roadmap.

Contributions:

  • User interviews
  • Competitive research
  • AI research
  • UX flows
  • Wireframes
  • AI-assisted rapid prototyping

Contributors: 

  • User Experience (me)
  • Lead Developer
  • PM
  • User interviews (Eight)

 

Note:

Visualizations below are recreated representations based on design work completed at Oracle. Images have been modified and do not reflect official Oracle branding, colors, or proprietary designs.

Project summary

The Journey:

Research & Analysis: The project began with extensive stakeholder interviews across Oracle’s support teams to understand current workflows and pain points. Analysis of the existing FAaaS DevOps interface revealed fragmented user journeys spanning multiple applications and control panels. This research laid the foundation for understanding how operators, SMEs, and engineers currently navigate between disparate systems to manage customer environments. Further research into the current limitations and pain-points of AI as a UI. 

Prototyping & Testing: Because of the complexity of defining a future AI-enhanced DevOPs, the approach employed AI-assisted rapid prototyping to quickly visualize and test interaction concepts. Prototypes ranged from low-fidelity workflows to medium-fidelity AI-simulated search interfaces, which enabled stakeholders to understand and experience the vision before committing to a phased implementation strategy.

The Transformation:

Design Evolution: The redesign focused on creating an intelligent search-first interface that could replace deep hierarchical navigation. Key iterations included designing natural language search, dynamic data generation patterns, and AI-driven content discovery workflows—all while leveraging previously established design patterns to maintain consistency across the platform.

Search Interface Design: For the past 20 years, Google has established the dominant search paradigm: a single input field that dynamically generates results matching user queries. This familiar pattern has proven universally effective, making it the ideal foundation for enterprise application data discovery.

The Oracle FAaaS DevOps platform was designed to leverage this established behavior through natural language search that enables users to build compound queries where each additional search term creates additive filters. For example, operators can search “all environments” then add “with DR enabled” to progressively narrow results or add “graph it” to visualize, with each query building upon previous conditions to create increasingly refined datasets. This keeps the user from having to learn complex navigation hierarchies. This AI-driven interface was designed to mirror known search simplicity while providing enterprise-specific data through intelligent contextual menus that adapt based on current inquiries and user intent.

Along with the simplicity, the design framework established patterns for human-AI collaboration where the system would suggest next steps while users retain decision authority over critical operations. The interface was designed to adapt contextually and personally.

Visual Highlights: To see the visual of the intended final design and transition planning, review the “in-depth” section below.

The Trouble:

Overview: The primary challenge was understanding user / AI touchpoints and pain. How do they interact with AI, how comfortable are they with AI, what are the downsides of AI from a UX perspective? 

Then there was the issue of years of accumulated redundancy and multi-level navigation, combined with ongoing service additions, created a complex starting point that required careful visioning before execution. 

Sections:

    • User behavior: Years of gesture-based devices, simple search-and-find, as well as failed chatbot experiences.
    • Information Architecture: The existing deeply nested navigation forced users through multiple levels to access routine operational data.
    • System Fragmentation: Operators were juggling multiple applications and control panels, creating inefficiency and increased error risk.
    • Transition Planning: Moving from legacy interfaces to AI-driven experiences required a clear target state to guide phased development and fallback options—access to tried and true navigational hierarchy.

Collaboration: Balancing the needs of different user types (operators, SMEs, engineers) while defining a unified future vision required extensive stakeholder AI-education and prototyping to build consensus around the target experience.

The Impact:

Results: Key deliverables included a comprehensive target state visualization, interaction design patterns for natural language search, design principles for human-AI collaboration, and a phased implementation roadmap. These provided Oracle’s development teams with concrete design specifications for transitioning from fragmented legacy interfaces to a unified, AI-enhanced DevOps platform. While stakeholder interviews informed design decisions throughout the process, full usability testing of the final interface concepts was not completed due to organizational changes before implementation.

Reflection & Future Directions:

Lessons Learned: The project reinforced the importance of defining the destination before mapping the journey, especially in complex enterprise transformations. AI-assisted prototyping proved invaluable for quickly visualizing and iterating on future-state concepts with stakeholders.

Conclusion:

By establishing a clear target vision for Oracle’s FAaaS DevOps platform, this project provided the foundation for a phased transition from fragmented legacy interfaces to a unified, intelligent operational experience that would reduce errors and improve efficiency for customer environment management.

IN-DEPTH EXPLORATION

Expand for visuals and in-depth explanations

AI RESEARCH

To understand AI user experience beyond my own perspective, I researched what people are actually saying online. As someone who works with technology daily, I needed to hear from typical users about what they like and dislike about AI interfaces.

I documented patterns from this research and classified them as pain or delight points. I also listened to AI experts like Allen Pike from the Vancouver AI Community to gather additional insights for future design directions.

Allen’s most valuable observation was comparing chatbot experiences to early terminal interactions. We’ve made significant progress toward natural user behaviors, yet chatbots force us back to pre-GUI text-based interaction. Picture this: you’re shopping for a phone on a website when a small window pops up saying “hey, I can help you.” After several attempts, neither the main site nor the chatbot gets you closer to your goal.

Chatbots are a step backward. While some like Google and GPT work well, most are a nuisance. Even AI image creation relies primarily on text input and text-based corrections. Apps like Photoshop have tried integrating AI, but text remains the main driver.

The card sorting exercise below organizes these research findings, classifying user sentiment patterns and expert insights to identify opportunities for improved AI interaction design.

This card sorting exercise organizes my research and expert insights into four crucial areas for future-facing AI design.

Best Practices identifies what every AI interaction should include: transparency about abilities and limitations, user control that enables customization to suit individual needs, diverse input methods that free users from single-input constraints, and quality responses that align output to specific requests rather than providing generic answers—a common problem with customer support chatbots.

Typical UI Lack reveals common failures in current implementations, particularly around response clarity where users need to assess trustworthiness, conversation management that allows users to stop, undo, or refine queries, and inadequate guidance for building better prompts.

Shortcomings highlights systemic AI issues including interface limitations, insufficient user education about AI failures, and environmental impact concerns.

The Future of AI explores emerging opportunities like ubiquitous presence, omniscient observation, and agentic behavior; multi-modal interactions spanning text, voice, gesture, and drawing; and new form factors that could enable smaller displays or empower non-personal devices.

This framework reveals the gap between what users need—transparency, control, clarity—and what most current AI interfaces provide: confusing interactions, limited customization, and poor conversation flow.

USER BEHAVIOR

The current trend to chatbot everything is a step backwards toward the 80’s command-line experience. User’s have mostly learned to use gestures, voice, and text. The chatbot experience reverts the user to a text-only or text-priority behavior. Along with an outmoded experience, users have had a plethora of failed  chatbot experiences from misinformation, to failed responses to completely missing the point of a request. This has been the experience from phonebots, chat windows, and voice assistants. Add to these inconveniences the fact that AI agents can introduce bias and spread biased information based on training data, while users often remain unaware of data storage practices and struggle with overwhelming information blocks that can’t be refined or scoped to their specific needs.

Forward looking interfaces need to break the sidewindow chatbot experience. When users already have a large window in front of them, forcing them into two separate interaction points—even if they are semi-linked—creates confusion and extra effort. Prompt engineering can be complicated, requiring heavy cognitive load before the agent is actually helpful. Users may need contextual onboarding and auto-formatting assistance for proper prompt configuration and help understanding why prompts failed to reduce the cognitive burden of prompt engineering. One further aid, users should be able to manually refine data scope and control information density rather than being forced to accept whatever the AI returns.

Users have been trained by search, assistive features, voice, and gestures to accomplish tasks naturally. AI interfaces need built-in flexibility to support how users want to work, incorporating the future evolution toward more voice interaction, natural gestures, and natural language processing—potentially even enabling smaller, contextual displays rather than forcing users into large, overwhelming interface windows. For example, if a user wants to circle something or remove an element, a quick gesture should enable that process.

INFORMATION ARCHITECTURE

In the early days, search radically changed how we interacted with the web. Prior to that, people had to hunt through directory structures or memorize exact addresses. Google transformed the web from a navigation nightmare into an instant discovery tool. This project applied that same transformation to enterprise operations, asking: how do we help operators achieve their goals more promptly? Guiding users from the abstraction of multiple navigation points to a specific query is the goal of flattening the information structure.

Along with this nested navigation paradigm came the composite behavior of adding a chat window on top of an already complex UI without meaningful integration between the interfaces. This means that the UI goes from deeply nested nav to also having a persistent overlay that the user must work around or within to accomplish their needs. This defeats the benefit of a smarter workflow. It further compartmentalizes the UI.

What the users need is for the interface to mold to their needs rather than forcing them to conform to the UI. Through stakeholder interviews, we discovered that operators managing customer environments already know what they need to accomplish when they come to DevOps. They’re primarily problem-hunting and rarely need to focus on healthy environments. When we demonstrated the search-first behavior, the operators immediately explained that a natural language query field matched exactly how they think about their work. They would typically enter queries like: ‘show me all [customer name] environments with high CPU usage’ or ‘environments in distressed state with DR enabled.’ For broader monitoring needs, queries like ‘system overview’ or ‘all environments status’ would provide comprehensive dashboards. With this they could compound the filters to define the information they need now. Then the UI presents the user with exactly what they need, how they need it, and when. 

Current DevOps

Search-first AI DevOps

SYSTEM FRAGMENTATION

Juggling multiple applications to accomplish one job creates the same friction as jumping all over the place in a single application that ignores user needs. DevOps suffered from both problems. Interviewing stakeholders, we began to see patterns in their behavior. They would click through levels, multiple applications, and a plethora of filters, in order to manage a single aspect of a service. In one conversation we observed the users flipping between a fleet monitor, an SMC application, and DevOps to see, for example, which maintenances failed.

The workflow breakdown was revealing: DevOps showed three failed environments, but SMC showed four for the same query. This data inconsistency meant users couldn’t trust either system and had to cross-reference with Fleet to verify results.

This example was rife with issues. First, we had already implemented in DevOps the ability for them to locate the the items which made their exploration into Fleet unnecessary. Second, both applications (SMC and DevOps) were calling the same API which meant that there was a bug. Third, we had no way to let the users know when we updated DevOps and the hierarchy conflated the problem of finding new features.

With a search-first, natural language approach, the user would simply be able to enter their query, compound the search when needed, and access unified, reliable data. This consolidation would eliminate the need for engineers to maintain multiple systems with conflicting APIs.

TRANSITION PLANNING

Leaping from an overloaded navigational system to an economic, lean search-first design was a large undertaking that would require a vast amount of time and planning. Therefore, the stakeholders and I needed to devise a phased rollout plan focusing on the most critical aspect of this new UI—natural language search. Keep in mind that, throughout all phases, the existing navigational structure would remain fully functional, ensuring operational continuity and providing familiar fallbacks for users during the transition.

Natural language search needed to be phase one because the system needed to begin collecting user interaction data and learning query patterns. It had to work alongside the current APIs and UI without disrupting existing workflows, while gradually becoming the primary interaction method.

Phase two would introduce agents using a Model Context Protocol (MCP) approach that would further guide system training and assist users. Individual agents would handle specific tasks while a central controller would distribute requirements and coordinate responses.

Phase three would leverage agentic insights to build more intelligent data structures and responses.

Phase four would implement dynamic page generation based on user queries and context.

Finally, assuming successful adoption, phase five would systematically remove less important static pages as users migrated to the search-first workflow.

Project summary The Journey: Research & Analysis: The project began with extensive stakeholder interviews across Oracle’s support teams to understand current workflows and pain points. Analysis of the existing FAaaS DevOps interface revealed fragmented user journeys spanning multiple applications and control panels. This research laid the foundation for understanding how operators, SMEs, and engineers currently […]