Case study · Enterprise product

SCAN+

One scan. Multiple destinations. Zero repetition.

Maya scans a few times a month. Grace scans every day. They walk up to the same printer expecting the same thing: scan once, and send it everywhere it needs to go. On HP's new platform, they couldn't.

Role

Senior Designer

Worked with

Concept team, Pattern team, Firmware partners, Research

Platform

HP enterprise printers

Status

Designed, tested, handed off · Shipped in Intent First

01 / Overview

The problem

When HP moved its enterprise printers to a new platform, multi‑destination scanning didn't carry over. People rescanned the same document for every destination.

What I did

I turned the approved Scan+ concept into one system for email, network folder and SharePoint: setup, authentication, grouped contacts, verification, recovery and print in the same job.

Where it landed

The design was tested with users and handed off. Before it was built, the product moved to Intent First, and multi‑destination shipped as part of it. I later joined that work.

Interactive prototype · One scan, every destination

Scope

Destination setup

Authentication

Grouped contacts

Verification

Recovery

2 personas

3 research studies

How the work moved

Concept team

Tested, approved concept

Use cases, edge cases, accessibility, detailed design

Pattern team

Reuse patterns, or request new ones

Firmware partners

Feasibility, then implementation

02 / Context

Scanning is not a feature. It is how work moves.

Enterprise printers sit at the centre of document-heavy workflows.

At scale

Patient records processed daily

Hospitals

High complexity

Multiple documents per case

Legal firms

Time-critical

Shipping documents in motion

24/7 logistics

High frequency

Daily operations and workflows

Corporate offices

Scanning is frequent. Speed is expected. Repetition creates friction.

When scanning slows down, work slows down.

03 / Problem

A platform upgrade quietly removed a workflow people relied on.

On the legacy platform, people could scan once and send to email, network folder, SharePoint and many other destinations together. The new platform was built for cloud-connected, AI-ready printing, but this capability didn't carry over.

The legacy platform had

Scan once, send to many destinations

Saved destinations and settings

One continuous job

The new platform was missing

One scan per destination

Setup repeated every time

Fragmented workflows

63%

Enterprise end users

Rated scan‑to‑email as their highest‑priority task.

64%

IT admins

Rated scan‑to‑network‑folder as very relevant.

23%

UX lift on the new platform

But the scanning workflow didn't improve.

The existing experience wasn't broken. It was simply tolerated. Repeated across thousands of users, every extra step became measurable inefficiency.

The task didn't change. The system no longer supported it.

Why bringing it back was hard

People

Expected one flow, and got disconnected workflows, repeated setup and no memory.

The system

Treated every destination as an island with its own logic, so every multi-destination job had to be rebuilt from scratch.

The platform

Limited what was possible: the design had to fit existing patterns and firmware limits while still feeling new.

This wasn't a flow redesign. It was reconstructing behaviour in an evolving system.

The brief became a dilemma

Improve the new platform, and lose nothing from the old one.

04 / Research & insights

People weren't adapting to the system. They were working around it.

3 studies with 200+ enterprise users.

01 · Before the concept

Foundational study on how people understood multi-destination scanning.

4 / 7

"Multiple" meant "more emails".

Most read "multiple destinations" as several email contacts, not kinds of places.

02 · Testing the concept

Usability test of two directions with 20 participants.

17 / 20

People thought destination first.

Participants chose where the scan should go before touching any settings.

03 · Refining the labels

Card sorting and naming research with 97 users.

40 / 52

The labels mostly landed.

40 of 52 found the labels fine; "More Destinations" lagged at 3.5/5.

Maya

Persona · Occasional walk-up user

"Walk up, finish the task, leave."

Needs

An obvious first screen, smart defaults and a forgiving flow.

Concern

Sending the wrong document to the wrong place.

Grace

Persona · High-volume daily user

"I have to type my own email address, even after I've signed in."

Needs

Saved destinations, several at once, and confidence before sending.

Priority

Every second saved multiplies across her jobs.

05 / Design direction

From feature design to outcome design.

The challenge wasn't redesigning scanning. It was restoring how people complete tasks.

Instead of asking

How do we improve each scanning flow?

We reframed it as

How can one scanning job hold several destinations?

The key shift

Destinations became outputs, not entry points. People defined the intent; the system handled delivery.

My role

My job was to make that answer hold for every destination, every entry point, and every way it could go wrong.

Email

Recipients

Network folder

Access

SharePoint

Path + PIN

Printed copy

Print settings

46 / 52

people, asked to name one app that sends to many places at once, chose "Scan to All", "Scan+" or "Multi-Scan", suggesting the terminology would be understood without explanation.

Scan to All

Scan+

Multi-Scan

Four decisions shaped the system.

1 Preserve what works.

People routed around the system instead of adapting to it. Simplify on top of what they knew.

2 One interface, two behaviours.

Maya needed speed, Grace needed depth. Make the default obvious and keep power within reach.

3 Destinations first.

Memory mattered more than features. Build around the core workflow; layer the rest over time.

4 Firmware as a design partner.

Constraints surfaced through collaboration. Resolve them early, so trade-offs are made with full context.

Progressive disclosure

Simple by default. Powerful when needed.

06 / Testing the direction

What testing showed, and what it didn't.

Before the detailed design, both directions were tested in 20 usability sessions with enterprise end users, office managers and IT admins, in the lab and remotely.

usability sessions

user groups: end users, office managers and IT admins

settings: in the lab and remote

The concept team tested two directions. I took the one the evidence chose and made it work everywhere.

Concept A

One flat list with "Show more"

5

Overall preference

5

Destinations section

17/20

Saving a favourite · ease 3.87

Concept B · Chosen

Grouped by destination type, actions next to each

13

Overall preference

14

Destinations section

18/20

Saving a favourite · ease 4.26

20 / 20

sent one scan to two different destinations in a single session.

4 / 20

skipped the folder they needed, because folders shared the person icon.

4 ways

different readings of the "+" button. Its purpose wasn't clear.

13 / 20

went back to check destinations and file type before sending.

What changed because of it

Selecting destinations worked. Managing them didn't, at first.

As a team, we:

Moved favourite and group controls next to destinations.

Gave each destination type its own icon.

Labelled entry points by where they lead.

Kept the scan summary before sending.

My part

Making each change work within the pattern library and firmware limits, across every destination.

What it didn't prove

The tests used prototypes.

Never measured in the tests:

Real delivery to several destination types.

Building a set from a blank screen.

Long-term learning.

Those would have been next.

Every decision had to pass one test

Does this let someone send one scan everywhere it needs to go, without repeating themselves?

07A / Decision · Combining destinations

One scan. Every destination.

Scan+ let people send a single scan to multiple destinations at once. Frequently used combinations surfaced through Favourites and Recents, reducing setup to a single tap.

Users could combine email, network folders, SharePoint and personal destinations into a single execution flow.

Key impact

Saved time by removing repetitive scanning.

Fewer errors from manual re-scans.

Consistent workflows across users and teams.

The reason

On the new platform, each destination was its own job. Grace, sending one contract to a client's email, a network folder and SharePoint, had to start over each time.

The choice

One field holds every destination type. People add any mix of email, network folder and SharePoint, including themselves, and can get a printed copy in the same job, then send once.

Address book · Browse mode

The address book adapted to the user's intent.

Users could browse across all destination types or choose one first. The same address book supported both modes.

One content layer.

Two intelligent modes.

Type-first mode

When intent was clear, people chose a destination type before browsing.

Filtered mode

The address book narrowed to only what matched the selected type.

34 / 52

Every entry point has to say where it leads.

A familiar contacts icon matched expectations for 34 of 52 people; a vague "More Destinations" split them five ways. So entry points were labelled by destination type, and each type got its own icon.

"It's one more click, but it's a lot more intuitive." (IT admin)

The trade-off

More entry points means more to learn. I kept them consistent, so every route leads to the same chip, the same details and the same controls.

For Maya · Auto suggestion

Users typed intent, not full addresses.

Users didn't need to remember exact addresses. They could start typing, choose from directory suggestions, and continue with a clean destination chip.

Selection became a chip

Once selected, only the display name stayed visible in the field.

Details stayed accessible

Tapping the chip revealed the underlying destination details.

The field stayed simple. The details stayed accessible.

One contact. Multiple destinations.

Groups and multi-destination contacts went in as a single chip, without giving up control of what was inside.

01 · Multi-destination contact

One chip, every address inside.

One address book entry held email, fax and network folder destinations.

02 · Destinations revealed

Tapping the chip exposed every destination inside the contact.

03 · Selection refined

Specific destinations could be removed without losing the rest.

Added as one. Controlled as many.

Email composition stayed inside the scan flow.

Enterprise scans often involved more than one recipient. Scan+ brought To, CC and BCC into the destination panel, so email delivery was composed without switching tools.

Email · Step 01 · Entry

Chosen from More Destinations.

Email was picked the same way as a folder or a SharePoint site.

Email · Step 02 · The key step

Recipients composed in flow.

To, CC and BCC supported direct, copied and blind-copied recipients. 9 in 10 people said "To" mattered most, so CC and BCC stayed one tap away.

Email · Step 03 · Exit

Back on the scan panel as one destination.

Every recipient returned as a single configured email destination, ready to send with the rest.

No app switching. Full email logic inside the scan.

SharePoint

Authentication entered the scan flow without breaking it.

SharePoint required users to verify access before sending. Scan+ kept authentication inside the familiar destination flow, so people could choose a path, enter a PIN and return to scanning without switching context.

SharePoint · Step 01

Path selected inside the destination panel.

People browsed SharePoint locations and chose the path without leaving the scan.

SharePoint · Step 02

PIN entered in flow.

Sign-in appeared as a familiar printer step, not a separate system detour.

SharePoint · Step 03

Back in the job.

Once verified, the SharePoint path returned to the scan panel alongside every other destination.

Secure when needed. Familiar by design.

SharePoint · Quick Sets

Quick Sets made repeated workflows one tap away.

Power users often scanned to the same SharePoint locations every day. Instead of repeating setup each time, Scan+ surfaced saved configurations directly in the destination flow.

Quick Sets · Step 01

Entered from destinations.

Users accessed SharePoint from More Destinations.

Quick Sets · Step 02

Saved path selected.

A saved SharePoint configuration could be chosen without rebuilding the path.

Quick Sets · Step 03

Added to scan.

The selected Quick Set returned to the scan panel as a ready-to-send destination.

Configured once. Recalled in one tap.

07B / Decision · Network folder

Network Folder stress-tested the destination model.

Network Folder carried the highest technical load. Search, contacts, manual setup, Quick Sets and subfolders all had to resolve into one consistent destination behaviour.

01 · Different ways in

Different entry points. One destination model.

Search, contacts, Quick Sets or manual setup, all resolving into one destination model.

Search

Start with a folder name or path.

Contacts

Select a contact that contains a folder destination.

Quick Sets

Recall saved folder workflows.

Manual setup

Enter path, credentials, and verify connection.

02 · Verification

Verification happened inline, not as a separate gate.

When people entered a network folder path, Scan+ verified access where the work was happening. Authentication and connection checks stayed inside the destination flow, so people didn't lose context.

61.5%

ranked the destination as the most important field.

1.9%

of rankings even mentioned "verify", and no one put it first. People needed access checked; they didn't want to manage it.

Verification · Step 01

Path entered in flow

People entered the folder path inside the destination panel.

Verification · Step 02

Verification stayed inline

Authentication and connection checks stayed in the same context.

Verification · Step 03

Destination added

Once verified, the folder returned as a configured destination.

Status at a glance

Every network folder path shows whether it is verified, not verified, or yet to verify.

The negotiation

Keep the checks. Make the status clear.

User need

Fewer interruptions

Firmware constraint

Verification at multiple stages

Best user flow

Buildable solution

Balancing user flow with firmware constraints.

The agreement

Required checks stayed. Each folder's status became visible.

Firmware needed verification at multiple stages. I agreed to retain those checks and proposed showing each network folder path with its status, so people could see where every folder stood.

Firmware: required verification

People: visibility instead of surprises

Every gate is a context break. Verification stayed in flow.

03 · Recovery

When verification failed, the flow stayed intact.

Wrong paths, stale credentials and timed-out connections were expected. Instead of forcing a restart, Scan+ surfaced each failure where the work was happening.

Recovery · Step 01

Failure surfaced inline

The system named the issue in the same panel.

Recovery · Step 02

Correction stayed in context

Users could retry credentials or update the path without restarting.

Recovery · Step 03

Recovery without restart

Once corrected, the destination was added and the scan continued.

The design assumed failure. It planned the recovery.

04 · Subfolders

Verified paths could go deeper.

Enterprise folder structures were rarely flat. Once a parent path was verified, people could move into nested subfolders without signing in again or restarting the setup.

Subfolders · Step 01

Browsing inside a verified path

After verification, the folder opened for browsing in place.

Subfolders · Step 02

Path updated as they moved

The destination path reflected the selected folder level, updating with every level people opened.

Subfolders · Step 03

Subfolder added as destination

The selected subfolder returned to the panel like any other destination.

Verified once. Navigable all the way down.

05 · Quick Sets

Quick Sets made trusted paths instant.

Some network folders were used every day. Quick Sets saved the path, credentials and defaults in admin settings (EWS, HP's Embedded Web Server), so the printer could recall the destination without rebuilding the flow.

Folder Quick Sets · Step 01

Entered from destinations

Quick Sets sat alongside the other ways into a destination.

Folder Quick Sets · Step 02

Quick Set recalled.

A saved folder workflow loaded with its settings.

Folder Quick Sets · Step 03

Ready to scan.

The job was ready without re-entering a path or signing in.

Setup happened in EWS. Recall happened in one tap.

Print a Copy

Print became another destination.

Scan+ kept Print a Copy, then integrated it into the same destination model as email, network folder and SharePoint. Physical output could now be configured and sent in the same scan job as digital destinations.

Print a Copy · Step 01

Print a Copy selected

Selectable like any other destination.

Print a Copy · Step 02

Copy options set inline.

Copies, sides and colour were set without leaving the scan flow.

Print a Copy · Step 03

Print and digital together.

A printed copy could be sent alongside digital destinations in the same scan job.

Multiple Print a Copy destinations, each with its own settings.

07C / Decision · Failure recovery

Failure had a type. Recovery had one answer.

Different destinations failed in different ways. Setup that was missing. Access that was denied. Inputs that were malformed. The system named each failure inline, then offered one consistent recovery across all of them.

01 · Setup and authentication

Setup and authentication failure

The system named missing setup or denied access where the destination was selected.

02 · Input

Input failure

Input failures happened when a value was malformed, caught before the scan was sent.

03 · Recovery

Same recovery model

Correct the issue or remove the failed destination without collapsing the rest of the job.

Every failure had the same recovery: remove the failed destination, keep the job.

08 / Outcome

Designed, tested, handed off.

What once took multiple jobs became one: a contract going to a client's email, a network folder and SharePoint, with a printed copy.

On the new platform

Separate jobs for each destination.

Configure. Authenticate. Wait. Repeat.

With Scan+

One destination list. One document. One send.

Designed

Tested

Handed off

Shipped in Intent First

Future scope

The destination model was only the foundation.

In parallel, the concept team explored how people could configure, speed up and review the job before sending.

Options

Adjust file type, colour, resolution, sides and quality without leaving the flow.

Quick Actions

Reusable presets bring frequent scan workflows closer to one tap.

Preview & Edit

Review pages before sending; rotate, reorder, delete or add pages.

09 / The pivot

Scan+ did not ship. And that is part of the story.

The reason was not design failure. It was a broader shift in how the organisation understood the problem.

Scan was not only hard to complete. It was hard to find across multiple walk-up apps.

That reframed the work from improving one feature to reorganising print and scan around user outcomes.

Scan+ had already moved in that direction, and multi-destination shipped as part of Intent First.

Old state · Fragmented

Multiple walk-up apps

Scan was hard to find

Print Release

USB Print

Cloud Storage

Scan

My Account

New state · Intent First

Outcomes first

Organised by what people want to do

Print

Release, manage, deliver

Scan

Capture, send, save

For me and my team

Multi-user

Where the work went

Destination-first flows

Start from the outcome, not the app.

Progressive disclosure

Show what's needed, when it's needed.

Inline recovery

Fix issues in context and keep momentum.

Multi-user behaviour

Designed for individuals and teams.

I later joined the Intent First work, and these principles came with me.

Scan+ didn't ship as Scan+. Multi-destination did, through Intent First.

10 / Reflection

Completeness felt right. Momentum would have been smarter.

Designing Scan+ was a series of trade-offs. Every constraint became a design surface.

Simplicity vs control

Casual users needed speed. Power users needed depth. Progressive disclosure kept the main flow simple and advanced controls available.

Legacy vs modernisation

Legacy users carried years of learned behaviour. The new platform had to modernise without feeling unfamiliar.

UX vision vs firmware

The best flow wasn't always the easiest to build. Network folder authentication became a deliberate trade-off for continuity.

Completeness vs momentum

Scoping every destination together made the first wave fragile. One destination at a time would have been smarter.

Three things worth naming

Complexity is a system problem, not a user problem.

Enterprise scanning is complex underneath; the user shouldn't feel it. Network Folder tested this clearly: the best decision was the one people never noticed.