End-to-end ownership
Solo designer from brief to dev handoff. In charge of audit, research, IA proposals, visual exploration, and final specs.
Scaling Jetpac's Navigation
Restructuring Jetpac's navigation from a single-product hierarchy to a four-product structure
Role
Product Design Lead
Collaborators
CTO & CGO
1 Designer
3 Engineers
1 PM
Timeline
Dec 2025 – Mar 2026
Scope
Web & App Navigation Information Architecture
Interaction Design
Stakeholder Management
Overview
Built around eSIMs, expanded into four products
Starting as an eSIM app, Jetpac expanded into Voice, Lounge Access, and Fast Track, but only 3% of customers were buying anything outside of eSIMs. This case study covers how the navigation was restructured across web and app to give every product a fair chance, without displacing the one driving 95% of revenue.
Impact
Pre-launch outcomes
Voice, Lounge Access, and Fast Track now have dedicated entry points for the first time. The 3% cross-sell baseline was the direct target; post-launch conversion data to follow.
Contributions
My role
Stakeholder alignment
Navigated competing directions from the CTO, business, and PMs, defending structural decisions while incorporating valid pushback into the final proposal.
Sitemap direction and IA proposals
Proposed 3 sitemap directions to surface trade-offs early, then iterated to a final structure reducing total pages by 29%.
Problem
Jetpac had outgrown its navigation
The structure had a commercial cost
Only 3% of customers were purchasing anything beyond eSIMs: Voice at 2%, Lounge Pass and Fast Track at 0.5% each. The products existed. The navigation made them invisible.
No home for new products
Voice, Lounge Pass, and Fast Track had no unified entry point. On web, they were missing entirely. On app, Voice had its own tab while Lounge and Fast Track were in "Perks", only accessible as data pack add-ons.
Misplaced and duplicated content
Commercial links were buried under company information. The same items appeared across the nav and footer with no clear hierarchy, creating conflicting wayfinding and no obvious path to conversion.
Original navigation
Goal
Make every Jetpac product as easy to find as the one everyone already knows
User goals
Travellers can discover any Jetpac product, without needing to know where to look or how the app is structured.
Business goals
Keep eSIM as the primary product while increasing cross-sell sales beyond 3% by making Voice, Lounge Access, and Fast Track discoverable.
Process
Website
Web allowed a full product-first hierarchy, unconstrained by a tab bar.
Competitive research & audit
I audited Jetpac's sitemap solo: 28 pages, 5 nav sections, then benchmarked against four eSIM competitors and a wider set of multi-product e-commerce brands. The finding was consistent: every eSIM competitor navigates like a single-product company and Jetpac wasn't one anymore.
Jetpac sitemap
Competitor research
Proposed Sitemaps
Consolidating Jetpac's navigation meant making calls about what counted as a product, what belonged in the footer, and how much the web and app could diverge. I proposed three directions to surface those trade-offs early.
What did stakeholders push back on?
CTO: Separate product pages on web make more sense than a single store destination — the store model works for app, not web.
Business: Currency and language selectors should stay separate, not grouped as a single pill.
Agreed: Lower-priority pages moved to the footer. Blog can be moved to within a nav section, reducing it from 5 sections to 4.
Process
App
The app had more restrictions, hence requiring a different approach to the website. The bottom bar and mobile context demanded fewer, broader categories.
Aligning on the App Navigation
Three proposals came from three different parts of the team. Each reflected a different view of the app's primary job.
Proposal 3 was mine. Voice, Lounge, and Fast Track are products, not navigation categories. Everything purchasable belongs in the Store. Home, Store, Manage, Profile maps to how users think: arrive, buy, manage, account. Leadership aligned on it.
Final App IA: Proposal 3 (Mine)
Exploring the Navigation's Visual Language
The Manage tab had no icon that clearly communicated its purpose. I explored 27 combinations of icon styles, active states, and label treatments before the team converged on a direction.
27 nav bar iterations: Stars indicate team preferences across icon styles and visual treatments
The preferred direction used an underline active state.
Leadership flagged it as outdated before handoff. The final version uses colour, label weight, and a filled icon. 3 signals, so the active tab reads clearly without relying on colour alone.
Designs
Website Navigation Bar
For desktop, originally a single bar with four sections. Now a two-level structure with contextual dropdowns, Products leading for the first time.
Desktop navigation
Same four sections, different structure for mobile. A full-screen drawer contains Products, Language, Currency, and account access. Outlined below are the 3 primary changes made.
Half-page to full-screen
Expanding Products and Resources to 11 sub-items created two competing scroll contexts in a half-page drawer. Full-screen removes that conflict.
Products added as a top-level section
The old nav had no Products section at all. Voice, Lounge, and Fast Track were invisible on mobile entirely.
Language and Currency separated
Previously combined into a single pill in the top bar. Now surfaced as individual rows in the drawer, making each setting independently accessible.
Default and Products
Resources, Offers and Support
App Navigation Bar
4 tabs: Home, Store, Manage, and Profile. Active and inactive states are distinguished through icon fill, colour, and label weight.
Navigation bar interaction, switching between tabs
Learnings
What I learned
1
Don't reference the pastIn a startup, whatever is currently live becomes the default benchmark for "good." But the existing nav was built for a different version of Jetpac which was a single-product app. Treating it as a reference point anchored early conversations to incremental changes rather than the structural rethink the product needed.
2
Reduction is a harder sell than additionGoing from 28 to ~17 pages meant convincing stakeholders to let go of pages they'd built and owned. Addition feels like progress; removal feels like loss. I underestimated how much of the IA work was change management, not just design.
3
Handoff is not the finish line The underline active state for the App I designed got flagged as visually outdated before the handoff review by a stakeholder. The final version changed as a result. On a live product, the design continues to be challenged after you've marked it as complete.
View more projects
