Tshwanelo Modise, Product Designer
{{ lightboxCaption }}
{{ lightboxCaption }}
 Click anywhere or press Esc to close
Tshwanelo Modise Product designer · Dubai Get in touch

Product designer with 10+ years in fintech, telecoms, and digital marketplaces.


What I do
01 — Frame Define the problem Align stakeholders · Map journeys · Set goals
02 — Research Validate with users Interview · Audit · Synthesise
03 — Design Design & deliver Structure · Prototype · Test · Ship
04 — Lead Lead & align Mentor · Influence · Deliver
Projects
Companies & clients
Recognition
{{ r.year }}

{{ r.title }}

{{ r.body }}
Interests

Exploring how thoughtful experience design can make complex information more understandable, accessible and empowering.

{{ t }}
← All projects

Pay Monthly

Designing a trustworthy rental financing experience for one of the UAE's largest property marketplaces, in partnership with Keyper.

Role Product Design Lead
Timeline 16 weeks
Platform iOS • Android
Industry Proptech/Marketplace
The design challenge

Three competing priorities. Zero room for compromise.

The challenge was to create a seamless rental application while balancing three competing demands: user trust, simplicity and financial compliance.

01

Trust

Earn trust before asking for sensitive information.

Users had to share payslips, bank statements and identity documents with an unfamiliar service.

The constraint Sensitive data collection was mandatory.
02

Simplicity

Make a complex process feel effortless.

The application required more information than a typical rental journey, without feeling overwhelming.

The constraint The information requirements couldn’t be reduced significantly.
03

Compliance

Simplify without compromising regulation.

Financial regulations dictated the verification steps, required evidence and sequence.

The constraint Mandatory steps couldn’t be removed.
The design reframe

The steps couldn’t change. The experience could.

The focus shifted from reducing the number of steps to reducing perceived effort, making the journey feel simpler, clearer and easier to complete.

Product hypotheses

Before designing, the team needed to validate three assumptions.

H1

Users understand Pay Monthly before starting an application.

H2

Income verification becomes the primary trust barrier.

H3

Reducing perceived effort matters more than removing mandatory steps.

Design decisions

Four decisions, and what each one cost.

DecisionWhyWhat it cost
01 Explain income verification before asking anyone to verify. People hesitate when financial information is requested without a reason. A slightly longer onboarding.
02 Reduce perceived effort rather than removing compliance steps. The regulatory requirements are fixed. The feeling of length is not. More progress indicators to build and maintain.
03 Break the application into manageable sections. Fewer decisions per screen, less to hold in mind at once. One additional transition.
Service blueprint

Seamlessly connecting Property Finder, Keyper, Lean verification and third-party banking services

Low Rising Peak Scroll →
01 Discover
02 Decide
03 Apply
04 Verify
05 Commit
Uncertainty Relative, from research synthesis
Low
Rising
Rising
Peak
Rising
Renter does
Browses rentals and sees a monthly figure beside the annual rent.
Enters income to see what they can afford.
Starts a three-step application.
Connects a bank account, or uploads statements.
Reviews the schedule, signs, and pays the first instalment.
Touchpoint
Search results · listing card
Eligibility sheet
Application intro
Proof of income · bank connect
Plan · agreement · card
Line of interaction
Property Finder
Flags eligible listings and shows the monthly equivalent.
Passes rent and income to Keyper.
Hands the applicant to Keyper as the regulated provider.
Keeps the listing and agent relationship intact.
Keyper
Returns an affordability range.
Owns the application and the regulatory obligations.
Assesses income. Uploads go to a human reviewer.
Issues the agreement, holds the mandate, pays the landlord annually.
Line of internal interaction
Bank connection
Read-only, one-time access under ADGM regulation.
Processes the card payment.
Design response
Put the option where people already look, not on a page nobody visits.
Answer eligibility before the application, so nobody applies to find out.
Name the partner and the time each step takes.
State the access model and the regulator before asking for anything.
Show all twelve instalments and both payments before signing.
What the map told us

Uncertainty did not build steadily. It spiked at one handover.

Every stage before verification was a decision the renter controlled. Verification was the first moment they had to trust someone else with something that mattered, and it sat exactly where the service passes from a marketplace they know to a provider they do not. That is where the design effort went.

The final experience

What shipped.

01 Set expectations before asking Income verification is explained before it is requested, so the ask arrives with a reason attached.
02 Disclose progressively Each section asks for one thing at a time. The full requirement is never presented at once.
03 Keep the property in view The application stays attached to the home being secured, so effort has something to be for.
04 Show progress throughout Where they are, what is done, and what is left, on every screen.
Final designs
Validation

We solved the right problem

The core experience works. Participants understood how Pay Monthly works, felt guided, and trusted the process. The remaining opportunity is a single moment rather than the model itself.

Evidence at a glance 15 participants · mixed nationalities, ages 20 to 50
93%/ Knew what to do next
Clear direction Always knew what to do next through the journey.
80%/ Rated it easy
Low effort Rated the journey easy or very easy to complete.
87%/ Felt confident
Trust Felt confident sharing personal and financial information.
Results

From 5 active tenancies to 47.

The UX improvements contributed to growth across the funnel, from first interest to signed tenancy.

+840% Active tenancies Grew from 5 to 47.
2× “Get Started” clicks Doubled to 8,395.
AED 3.8M Active tenancy value Total rent under active Pay Monthly tenancies.
← All projects
{{ active.num }}
{{ active.client }}·{{ active.sector }}·{{ active.year }}

{{ active.title }}

{{ active.subtitle }}

{{ n_overview }} Overview

{{ active.overview }}

My contribution
{{ con }}
{{ figPhases }} How the work ran, start to handoff
Phase Key activities Delivered
{{ ph.n }}
{{ ph.name }}
·{{ it }}
{{ ph.out }}
{{ n_context }} Context

{{ active.contextTitle }}

{{ active.context }}

The five questions we could not answer
? {{ q }}

{{ active.context }}
{{ figStakeholders }} {{ stakeTitle }}
{{ stakeInitiator }}
{{ stakeHub }}
{{ sp }}
{{ stakeNote }}
{{ n_problem }} The problem

The business problem

{{ active.bizProblem }}

The user problem

{{ active.userProblem }}

{{ figTensions }} {{ tensionTitle }}
{{ tn.t }} {{ tn.d }}
{{ tensionCallout }}
“{{ active.pullQuote }}”
{{ active.pullSource }}
{{ n_research }} Research

How we stopped guessing

{{ active.research }}

Designed for {{ pe }}
{{ figEmpathy }} What clients said, thought, did and feltOpen full size ↗
{{ figEmpathy }} What clients said, thought, did and felt
{{ q.label }}
{{ n.text }}
{{ figBench }} How we compared to the tools clients already use
Capability {{ bc.name }}
{{ br.f }} {{ bcell.glyph }} {{ bcell.t }}
● Present◐ Partial○ Absent
{{ figBench }} How we compared to the tools clients already useOpen full size ↗
Seven capabilities against HSBCnet and Mashreq NeoBiz. The pattern was hard to miss: we held our own on export and reporting, and lost on everything that let a client answer their own question.
{{ n_insights }} What we learned
{{ i.n }}

{{ i.title }}

{{ i.body }}
{{ n_principles }} The rules we set

The rules we agreed before drawing anything, so that when we later disagreed we could settle it on the principle rather than on who was most senior.

{{ p.n }}

{{ p.title }}

{{ p.body }}
{{ n_exploration }} What we tried

Three directions, one task

{{ active.exploration }}

{{ figBoard }} The three directions we testedOpen full size ↗
{{ dl.key }} {{ dl.label }} {{ dl.verdict }}
Direction A
Rejected
Direction B
Partially adopted
Direction C
Shipped
{{ n_decisions }} What we decided
#Decision{{ decisionHead }}
{{ d.n }} {{ d.what }}
{{ d.why }} Cost{{ d.tradeoff }}
{{ d.tradeoff }}
{{ n_solution }} The solution

{{ active.solutionTitle }}

{{ active.solution }}

{{ figCycle }} {{ cycleTitle }}
{{ ct.t }}
{{ cb.t }}
{{ cycleLoop }}
{{ cycleNote }}
{{ figChain }} {{ chainTitle }}
{{ ch.t }}
{{ chainNote }}
{{ figLifecycle }} {{ lifeTitle }}
{{ lc.n }} {{ lc.name }} {{ lc.note }}
{{ lifeNote }}
{{ figApproval }} {{ approvalTitle }}
{{ ap.t }}
{{ approvalGate }}
Yes {{ approvalYes }} {{ approvalYesNote }}
No {{ approvalNo }} {{ approvalNoNote }}
{{ approvalNote }}
{{ figBlueprint }} Service blueprint: what the client sees, and what it takesOpen full size ↗
Five stages, five lanes. This was the thing that finally got payments engineering, operations and compliance arguing about the same problem at the same time, and where the gaps in the correspondent chain stopped being an oversight and became a decision.
{{ n_designs }} Final designs

{{ designsTitle }}

{{ ls.name }}. {{ ls.caption }}

{{ phonesTitle }}

{{ phonesNote }}
{{ ph.n }} {{ ph.name }} {{ ph.caption }}

{{ screensTitle }}

{{ screensNote }}
{{ scr.caption }}
{{ active.slot }}
{{ slotCaption }}
{{ n_reflection }} Looking back

What changed

{{ active.outcome }}

What I would do differently

{{ active.lesson }}
Experience
Download CVPDF ↓
{{ r.dates }} {{ r.span }}

{{ r.title }}

{{ r.org }} {{ r.type }}
{{ r.place }}
{{ r.clients }}
{{ aw }}
{{ p }}
Tshwanelo Modise, Product designer, Dubai © 2026
That's not it. Try again.