Case 04 · Kaizen Gaming · Under NDA

Design that survived growth

Seven years at Stoiximan and Betano, growing design from one team into a fifty-five-person function — and building the structure that kept quality repeatable.

Role
Lead Designer → Product Design Manager
When
Apr 2018 — Apr 2025
Where
Kaizen Gaming · Stoiximan / Betano

Challenge

A small design team inside a fast-growing operator, working like a service desk where quality depended on whoever picked up the ticket.

Approach

Standards, critique and career expectations before headcount, then designers embedded in product teams on one shared definition of quality.

Result

A multi-team design function that outlasted me, with evidence as the default and shared patterns lifting quality across products.

7years, two rolesLead Designer, then Product Design Manager
2brands at scaleStoiximan and Betano
1→55team to multi-team function

The problem

What was actually wrong

Sportsbook and gaming at scale is a hostile environment for design quality: an enormous surface, content that changes by the second, and every market wanting something slightly different.

The craft was there; it did not survive growth. There was no shared standard to critique against, no structure to hire into, and no way for a designer to see what better looked like.

Before

DESIGN
A service desk. Fast, reactive, and only as good as whoever picked up the ticket.

After

SQUADSQUADSQUADSTANDARDS · CRITIQUE · LADDER
Designers embedded in product, standing on one shared definition of quality.

My role

Who did what

Mine

  • Grew design from a small team into a mature multi-team function.
  • Put the standards, critique rituals and career expectations in place that made quality repeatable rather than personal.
  • Led design across the core betting and gaming experiences in several markets.
  • Mentored designers and design leads — craft, product thinking and influence.

The team’s

  • Designers owned their product areas end to end and brought the evidence to critique.
  • Product and engineering leadership held the roadmap and the constraints the work had to survive.
  • Research and analytics supplied the observation decisions were made against.

Process

How it went

  1. 01

    Name the standard before hiring

    Career expectations and a shared definition of quality first, then leads mentored to hold them — otherwise growth just multiplies inconsistency, and the function stops at what one person can review.

  2. 02

    Make critique a ritual

    A recurring, structured critique with rules about what is being asked for. Feedback stops depending on who is in the room.

  3. 03

    Move decisions off opinion

    Research alongside experimentation, so a disagreement resolves into a test rather than into seniority.

  4. 04

    Share patterns across products

    Reusable patterns and shared standards raise quality everywhere at once, instead of product by product.

Before

DESIGNERSTAKEHOLDERSENIORITY
The loudest or most senior view wins, and nobody learns anything.

After

DESIGNERSTAKEHOLDERAN EXPERIMENT
The disagreement becomes a question the product can answer.

Decisions

What was chosen, and what it cost

The career ladder and standards before headcount

Over
Hiring first and formalising later
Because
People join a structure or they join a mood. A designer who cannot see what better looks like invents their own definition, or leaves.
It cost
Slower hiring at exactly the moment the roadmap wanted more hands.

Continuous observation of the product

Over
Research rounds scheduled per project
Because
In a product that changes by the second, a study is out of date by the time it is written up.
It cost
A commitment with no finish line, defended in every planning cycle.

Reusable patterns across products

Over
Letting each team optimise its own surface
Because
Local optimisation across many teams produces something that feels like several products.
It cost
Teams lose some autonomy, and the system has to earn it back by being faster to use than to ignore.

Outcome

What came of it

Design went from one team to a fifty-five-person function with standards, critique and career expectations — and stayed that way after I left, which is the only real test of whether the structure was ever mine or the organisation's.

Evidence became the default: research and experimentation shaping decisions around outcomes rather than output.

Shared patterns and standards lifted quality, consistency and delivery speed across products rather than inside one.

Lesson

What it cost me to learn

Most of this work lives inside production betting products and cannot be shown as screens. What is portable from seven years here is the operating model, not the artwork.