Case study: Insights / 2022

Macquarie's treasury analysts had no way to capture the reasoning behind a report, so I designed a 0 → 1 commentary system that made their decisions traceable and ready for APRA audits.

Hero — Insights overview

My role
Product Designer. I led research, design and delivery end to end for this 0 → 1 feature, working directly with analysts and reviewers and across product, engineering and QA.
My team
2 product owners, 2 backend developers, 1 frontend developer, 1 feature analyst, 2 QAs — plus many users and stakeholders.
Timeline
3 months across three releases — MVP, 1.1 and 1.2.

Commentary that lives where the report lives, anchored to the exact visual and data state it describes.

Features

Commentary sidebar

01 Commentary in the report, not beside it

Analysts capture the reasoning where the numbers live, as they work, instead of rebuilding it later from Excel notes and Teams messages.

Contextual anchoring

02 Footnoting instead of tagging

PowerBI visuals couldn't be named consistently without user input, which broke the tagging concept. Footnoting — a convention analysts already knew from technical and academic work — connected commentary to visuals without depending on named elements.

Rich text editor

03 Visual highlight on reference

Tagging or hovering a footnote elevates its visual on the page. Developers first called it unfeasible; once I showed how much clarity it bought, they reinvestigated and shipped it.

Mentions & notifications

04 Snapshot mode

Commentary that references a visual captures a frozen version of it — filters and data state intact. This is the piece that made audits genuinely easier.

Version history

05 Version history per calculation run

Recalculating a report wipes and replaces all its data, even for a one-value change. Tying history to the run meant commentary survived recalculation instead of being destroyed by it.

Export to PDF

06 End-of-day commentary, reusable

The daily summary analysts had been rebuilding by hand became a structured, formattable artefact they could carry forward and send on.

The process

Problem

When APRA audited a treasury report, the analysts who wrote it had to reconstruct their own reasoning from Excel notes, Teams messages and half-remembered conversations.

Treasury runs on multi-billion-dollar decisions made every day across spreadsheets, dashboards, email and Teams. That sprawl is why MARS existed — at its worst, the same formula in three spreadsheets gave three teams three different numbers for the same data.

Insights took on one specific edge of that problem: the rationale behind a report was never captured where the report lived, so looking back was slow and fragmented, and risked losing the exact context an audit depended on.

Before state — rationale scattered across Excel notes, Teams and email

Analysts could capture decisions in context, so preparing for an APRA audit stopped being an archaeology exercise.

Impact

01

Audit prep overhead reduced

Rationale was captured in the report as analysts worked, instead of reconstructed from scattered notes when an audit landed.

02

Decision context preserved

Snapshots and version history meant the exact data state behind a comment survived recalculations and stayed referenceable.

03

Ambiguity eliminated

Footnoting anchored each insight to the specific visual and data it referenced, so reviewers knew exactly what a comment was about.

04

Adoption by fit

The feature mirrored existing habits — footnoting, and reusing end-of-day commentary — which is what drove uptake.

Impact here is qualitative by design — this was a 0 → 1 internal feature measured by whether the reasoning behind a report survived an audit, not by a conversion number.