Building Liquid:
M1's First Design System

When I joined M1 Finance, there was no design system—just duplicated work and inefficiency. I identified this gap, advocated for investment, and built Liquid from the ground up. Within 12 months, I drove 80% company-wide adoption and improved team efficiency by 30%, enabling M1 to ship faster in a competitive fintech market.
Invest light and dark

The Problem

Moving Fast, Building Slow

M1 Finance operates in a fast-paced fintech environment where speed to market is critical. When crypto became hot, we needed to ship products quickly to capitalize on market momentum. But our reality didn't match our ambitions.

The team wasn't working inefficiently by choice—they simply lacked the infrastructure. We needed a design system, but no one had built one before at M1.

What I observed:

  • Designers were rebuilding the same components repeatedly
  • Engineers spent 2-3 days per sprint (20-30% of their time) clarifying design specs and fixing design defects in QA
  • No scalable foundation as the team grew from 3 to 11 designers
  • Our visual language didn't reflect our premium brand positioning

Impact & Outcomes

80%

company-wide adoption across design and engineering

30%

efficiency improvement (saved 2-3 days per sprint per team member)

Reduced design debt:

company-wide adoption across design and engineering

Faster time to market:

company-wide adoption across design and engineering

Building Coalition

I took a methodical approach to gaining support:

Design leadership: Presented my reasoning and data to my manager, who became an early champion
Design team: Got alignment and support from the growing design team through training
Engineering: Demonstrated how a design system would improve their efficiency and code quality

The team was open-minded but inexperienced with design systems. I positioned Liquid not as a design tool, but as an investment in organizational efficiency.

Building the Case

Data-Driven Advocacy

We knew we needed a way to measure the impact of the design system. In order to secure organizational buy-in and resources, we would need a strategic approach. We needed to gather some data, and anallyze from there.

The findings were clear: Teams spent 2-3 days per two-week sprint on avoidable design-related work—roughly 20-30% of their capacity.

Gathering Evidence
I surveyed designers and engineers across the company with specific questions:

  • How much time per sprint do you spend clarifying design requirements?
  • How often are design defects found in QA?
  • What slows down your workflow?

Building Liquid from Zero

I established three core principles, that supported our business and design principles, to guide all team decisions:

North Star Principles

Upscale Our Design

We needed to improve our design to reflect our premium brand, and move beyond functional to inspirational

Empower Teams

Help our teams be more efficient and consistent and reduce duplicative work

Drive Adoption

A design system is only valuable if it's used, we wanted to scale across the organization

Governance

Starting Centralized
I chose a centralized governance model intentionally:
  • All contributions flowed through me for quality control
  • Engineers could propose components or follow a process to add to the backlog
  • I finalized components, documented them, and managed releases

Prioritization Framework

I developed a simple framework to manage the backlog:

  • Team demand: How many teams need this component?
  • Project dependency: Is this blocking a current initiative?

This kept us focused on high-impact work and prevented us from building components no one would use.

Establishing Rituals

To maintain momentum and alignment, I created structure:

  • Two weekly meetings: One for designers, one for engineering
  • Two Slack channels: For announcements and async collaboration
  • Weekly updates: Shared progress, upcoming work, and adoption metrics

The Turning Point: The 9-Month Redesign

While we were building Liquid incrementally, adoption was slow. Components existed, but teams weren't consistently using them. We needed a catalyst.

The Opportunity

Executives wanted an upgrade to match our premium brand, we needed an overall redesign. Engineering leadership supported the overhauling the codebase to improve performance and reduce technical debt. Design leadership wanted to mature our brand to feel more premium and trustworthy. I saw the opportunity to align these initiatives with Liquid adoption.The strategy: Use the redesign as the vehicle to rebuild every pattern and style on top of Liquid. This would force adoption while simultaneously elevating our brand.

Execution

Over nine months, I led the redesign while simultaneously:

  • Redefining our foundational elements (color, typography, spacing)
  • Rebuilding components to reflect our premium positioning
  • Documenting everything in both Figma and Confluence
  • Training designers and engineers on the new system

This wasn't just a visual refresh—it was a complete rearchitecture of how we built products at M1.

Results: We reached 80% company-wide adoption by tying Liquid to a strategic business initiative.

For most of the project, I operated solo—building components while also managing governance, advocacy, and adoption. This dual role was challenging but strategic. The breakthrough: When I presented our 30% efficiency improvement metric to leadership, it unlocked resources. I was promoted to Design System Manager and given a designer to manage and a PM to help with backlog management and communications.

Cultural Shift

The impact went beyond metrics. Liquid became part of M1's identity—we even made t-shirts. It transformed how teams worked together and established design as a strategic function, not just a service organization.

The Success of Liquid led to:

Reflection

The most important lesson: a design system is not a project with an end date. It's living infrastructure that evolves with the organization. Success isn't building it—it's maintaining momentum and adoption over time. It's Really About People!

The technical work of building components is table stakes. The harder, more important work is: