IT Asset Management Dashboard
The interface presents data in a clean, well-organized manner with clear separation between asset metrics and detailed assignments, enhancing readability and quick access. However, the design could benefit from improved filter input visibility and more intuitive status labeling to further boost user efficiency and comprehension.
Public
Design Score
Polish Opportunities
Design Perspectives
0To Review
Recommended Fixes by Impact
0Total
Fixes by Category
3
Color & Contrast2
Content Readability & Clarity3
Visual Consistency, Imagery & Media0
Navigation & Structure1
Conversion & Actions0
Tone, Friendliness & Delight4
Accessibility & Input Ergonomics3
Efficiency & Cognitive Load1
Flow & States Completeness1
Strategic DesignRecommended Fixes by Impact
0Critical
1Major
13Moderate
5Minor
No Obvious Action to Process Pending Assignments
Major
Flow & States Completeness
The Problem
The pending assignments table shows rows and statuses but there is no clear call to action or button to process or act upon the pending assignments.
Why it Matters
Users may be unsure how to proceed with provisioning the assets or managing the listed pending assignments, leading to confusion or delay.
How to Fix
Add a clear and prominent button or action link within or near the pending assignments section to allow users to progress or manage tasks such as 'Provision Asset' or 'Next Steps'.
Issue Highlights
Low contrast for placeholder text in search field
Moderate
Color & Contrast
The Problem
The placeholder text inside the search input field ('Search by name, email, depart') appears in a light gray color on a white background, likely below WCAG AA contrast ratio of 4.5:1, making it difficult to read.
Why it Matters
Users with mild visual impairments or in bright environments may struggle to see the placeholder text, reducing ease of use for searching.
How to Fix
Increase the contrast of the placeholder text by using a darker gray color to meet at least WCAG AA contrast (4.5:1) against the white background.
Issue Highlights
Insufficient contrast for inactive sidebar icons and text
Moderate
Color & Contrast
The Problem
The sidebar icons and text for inactive menu items below 'IT Admin' are in a medium gray color on a white background, likely below WCAG AA contrast ratio of 4.5:1. This reduces text readability and icon visibility.
Why it Matters
Users with vision impairments may find it harder to identify inactive navigation options quickly.
How to Fix
Use a darker gray or black color for the inactive sidebar icons and text to ensure minimum contrast ratios of 4.5:1 against the white background.
Issue Highlights
Unclear timezone for displayed dates and times
Moderate
Ambiguous Date/Time/Timezone
The Problem
The table and recent deployments use dates and times (e.g., '27 Jul 2003', 'Today 10:35 AM') without specifying the timezone or format context.
Why it Matters
Users may misunderstand when the asset allocation or deployment events actually occurred, leading to errors in scheduling or data interpretation.
How to Fix
Add explicit timezone indicators or clarify the time context near date/time fields or in a global page setting.
Issue Highlights
Inconsistent icon background colors in asset allocation cards
Moderate
Visual Consistency, Imagery & Media
The Problem
The icons in the first three asset allocation cards have differing background colors: the first is a light blue, the second and third are a light purple. This inconsistency in icon background color can confuse users about grouping or categorization.
Why it Matters
Users may misinterpret the data or categories because the visual inconsistency suggests different contexts or types when the data might be related.
How to Fix
Standardize the icon background color across all asset allocation cards to maintain consistent visual grouping.
Issue Highlights
Small search input field tap target
Moderate
Accessibility & Input Ergonomics
The Problem
The search input field in the pending assignments section appears narrow, requiring precise tapping especially on touch devices.
Why it Matters
Smaller tap targets increase the chance of user input error and reduce ease of use on touchscreens, leading to frustration.
How to Fix
Increase the height and horizontal padding of the search input field to provide a tap target of at least 44x44 pixels.
Issue Highlights
Lack of clear hierarchy between key figures and their descriptions
Moderate
Content Readability & Clarity
The Problem
Numbers such as '44', '22', '31' stand out, but descriptions like 'Active in IT queue', 'Monitors' are visually similar in weight and proximity, reducing clarity about their relationships.
Why it Matters
Users may have to spend more time understanding what each number represents, slowing down information processing and increasing cognitive load.
How to Fix
Increase font size or weight contrast for headings versus descriptions, and add spacing or visual grouping to separate labels from numbers more clearly.
Issue Highlights
Unlabeled icon used in asset cards creates ambiguity
Moderate
Visual Consistency, Imagery & Media
The Problem
The icons shown in the asset allocation cards (such as computer displays) lack an explicit label or tooltip explaining their meaning, which may confuse some users.
Why it Matters
Without clear labeling, users may not fully understand what each icon represents, reducing the clarity and ease of use of the interface.
How to Fix
Add accessible labels or tooltips to icons for better clarity on their meaning.
Issue Highlights
Primary CTA label '+ New asset request' is vague
Moderate
Conversion & Actions
The Problem
The primary call-to-action button is labeled '+ New asset request', which lacks specificity about what creating an asset request entails or what the next step is.
Why it Matters
Users may be uncertain what happens after clicking the button, leading to hesitation or confusion, which can reduce conversion effectiveness.
How to Fix
Use a more descriptive CTA label that clearly indicates the action, such as 'Request New IT Asset' or 'Create Asset Allocation Request'.
Issue Highlights
Filter dropdowns are tightly spaced
Moderate
Accessibility & Input Ergonomics
The Problem
The filter dropdown menus for 'Start date', 'Department', and 'Status' are positioned tightly next to each other, with minimal horizontal padding between them.
Why it Matters
Closely placed interactive elements increase the likelihood of accidental taps or clicks on the wrong control, particularly on touch devices.
How to Fix
Add spacing of at least 8-12 pixels between the dropdown menus to ensure clear separation and reduce mis-taps.
Issue Highlights
Duplicate Department Filters Cause Confusion
Moderate
Efficiency & Cognitive Load
The Problem
There are some inconsistent department filters in different sections: the sidebar menu has department names under IT Admin, and the Pending assignments area has a separate 'Department' dropdown filter, requiring repeated decisions about department scope.
Why it Matters
Repeated decision points that address the same concept cause users to waste time reconciling filter scopes and create uncertainty about the current data context.
How to Fix
Unify filtering by department into a single global filter that applies to the entire view or clearly communicate the different scopes to avoid confusion.
Issue Highlights
Dashboard Lacks Visual Hierarchy and Emphasis
Moderate
Strategic Design
The Problem
The asset allocation dashboard shows multiple information cards with similar style and size, making the interface appear flat with no strong visual anchor. The repeated card pattern offers no clear prioritization except for top-left placement. Important summary metrics do not stand out enough to quickly guide users' attention.
Why it Matters
Users may find it difficult to instantly identify the most critical information or next steps from the dashboard, reducing efficiency and increasing cognitive load.
How to Fix
Introduce a stronger visual hierarchy by emphasizing key metrics with larger or more colorful cards, icons, or typography. Use contrast or grouping to direct user attention to highest-value items or actions.
Issue Highlights
Small icon buttons in left sidebar
Moderate
Accessibility & Input Ergonomics
The Problem
The icons next to 'Inventory', 'Software Inventory', and 'Settings' in the left navigation bar appear quite small with limited clickable area outside the icon itself.
Why it Matters
Small targets on narrower sidebar elements make it harder for users to reliably activate the button, especially for users with motor impairments.
How to Fix
Increase the tap target size around each icon to meet recommended 44x44 pixels minimum touch target size, possibly by increasing padding or hit area.
Issue Highlights
Multiple Small Filters Create Micro-Steps for User
Moderate
Efficiency & Cognitive Load
The Problem
The Pending assignments table includes multiple separate filters (sort by, department, status) which require users to make several micro-decisions to find relevant data.
Why it Matters
Multiple filter controls increase cognitive load and slow users from quickly locating the desired assignments.
How to Fix
Consolidate filter options into a single filter control or use pre-defined filter presets to reduce the number of micro-steps users must take.
Issue Highlights
Low contrast for descriptive labels under asset numbers
Minor
Color & Contrast
The Problem
The descriptive text below the numeric asset counts (like 'HM-approved · SharePoint', 'Pooled seats', and 'Ready to assign') appear in very light gray on white, likely below WCAG AA contrast. This makes supporting information less readable.
Why it Matters
Users may overlook important contextual information as it is visually subdued.
How to Fix
Increase text contrast by using a darker gray that meets contrast requirements or provide a subtle background behind the text.
Issue Highlights
Status filter uses unclear label 'All statuses'
Minor
Content Readability & Clarity
The Problem
The filter dropdown on the top right shows 'STATUS All statuses' which is grammatically vague and may confuse users whether it includes 'None' or 'Pending' statuses.
Why it Matters
Users may not understand what statuses are included or excluded by this filter, possibly leading to confusion when searching or filtering assignments.
How to Fix
Use clearer labels like 'All Statuses' or 'Any Status'.
Issue Highlights
Misalignment of filter dropdowns in pending assignments table header
Minor
Visual Consistency, Imagery & Media
The Problem
The department and status dropdown filters in the 'Pending assignments' section are not aligned horizontally with the search input and sorting dropdown, causing a slightly uneven layout.
Why it Matters
Misalignment can cause a cluttered appearance, making the interface less polished and potentially harder to scan for users.
How to Fix
Align all filter controls horizontally on the same baseline or use consistent spacing between them.
Issue Highlights
Right panel recent deployments entries lack clear affordance
Minor
Accessibility & Input Ergonomics
The Problem
The recent deployments items on the right do not strongly convey they are interactive (if they are clickable) as they look like static cards with no hover or button style.
Why it Matters
Users might overlook these elements as actionable items if they do not visually appear interactive, reducing discoverability.
How to Fix
Add clear interactive affordances such as hover effects, button styling, or underline links to indicate clickability.
Issue Highlights
Dashboard Cards Show Unnecessary Detailed Text
Minor
Efficiency & Cognitive Load
The Problem
The top arrangements of asset allocation cards include secondary descriptions with small text (e.g. 'HM-approved · SharePoint', 'Docks & kits') that adds visual clutter without offering direct interaction or value.
Why it Matters
Excess non-actionable text can distract users from focusing on key metrics and add to visual overload.
How to Fix
Simplify these cards by removing or hiding secondary descriptive text unless explicitly needed for user decisions.
Issue Highlights