Enterprise SaaS / Product Strategy
Enterprise SaaS / Product Strategy
Product strategy supporting a $1.5B enterprise SaaS sale
Product strategy supporting a $1.5B enterprise SaaS sale
Product strategy supporting a $1.5B enterprise SaaS sale
Client: Snapsheet
Client: Snapsheet
Snapsheet’s enterprise platform powered claims operations for some of the industry’s largest insurers, including GEICO, Liberty Mutual, Nationwide, USAA, Zurich, Chubb, and CNA. Working directly with the CTO, product strategy efforts translated operational complexity into clearer direction, helping teams align around what to build and why.
Snapsheet’s enterprise platform powered claims operations for some of the industry’s largest insurers, including GEICO, Liberty Mutual, Nationwide, USAA, Zurich, Chubb, and CNA. Working directly with the CTO, product strategy efforts translated operational complexity into clearer direction, helping teams align around what to build and why.
Snapsheet’s enterprise platform powered claims operations for some of the industry’s largest insurers, including GEICO, Liberty Mutual, Nationwide, USAA, Zurich, Chubb, and CNA. Working directly with the CTO, product strategy efforts translated operational complexity into clearer direction, helping teams align around what to build and why.
Snapsheet’s enterprise platform powered claims operations for some of the industry’s largest insurers, including GEICO, Liberty Mutual, Nationwide, USAA, Zurich, Chubb, and CNA. Working directly with the CTO, product strategy efforts translated operational complexity into clearer direction, helping teams align around what to build and why.
Context
Context
Context
Context
SnapSheet was building an enterprise platform intended to replace a fragmented claims workflow spread across disconnected tools, legacy systems, and manual coordination. The product needed to support internal teams, customers, vendors, documentation, photos, location data, and the unpredictable nature of live service interactions.
SnapSheet was building an enterprise platform intended to replace a fragmented claims workflow spread across disconnected tools, legacy systems, and manual coordination. The product needed to support internal teams, customers, vendors, documentation, photos, location data, and the unpredictable nature of live service interactions.
SnapSheet was building an enterprise platform intended to replace a fragmented claims workflow spread across disconnected tools, legacy systems, and manual coordination. The product needed to support internal teams, customers, vendors, documentation, photos, location data, and the unpredictable nature of live service interactions.
Before the product could create real business value, it had to become more than another layer in an already complicated process. Early versions risked introducing a new workflow without clearly improving the existing one.
Before the product could create real business value, it had to become more than another layer in an already complicated process. Early versions risked introducing a new workflow without clearly improving the existing one.
Before the product could create real business value, it had to become more than another layer in an already complicated process. Early versions risked introducing a new workflow without clearly improving the existing one.
The work centered on translating operational complexity into clearer product direction before features entered the pipeline, helping define what needed to be built, how workflows should connect, and how product, engineering, and leadership could align around a more usable enterprise platform.
The work centered on translating operational complexity into clearer product direction before features entered the pipeline, helping define what needed to be built, how workflows should connect, and how product, engineering, and leadership could align around a more usable enterprise platform.
The work centered on translating operational complexity into clearer product direction before features entered the pipeline, helping define what needed to be built, how workflows should connect, and how product, engineering, and leadership could align around a more usable enterprise platform.
The Challenge
The Challenge
The Challenge
The Challenge
The workflow SnapSheet needed to replace was fragmented across multiple systems, manual steps, and disconnected handoffs. Users had to move between tools to find information, record updates, coordinate with vendors, review documentation, and respond to customers in real time.
The workflow SnapSheet needed to replace was fragmented across multiple systems, manual steps, and disconnected handoffs. Users had to move between tools to find information, record updates, coordinate with vendors, review documentation, and respond to customers in real time.
The workflow SnapSheet needed to replace was fragmented across multiple systems, manual steps, and disconnected handoffs. Users had to move between tools to find information, record updates, coordinate with vendors, review documentation, and respond to customers in real time.
The complexity was not only technical. The work itself was unpredictable. Each interaction could unfold differently depending on the customer, the details available, the level of urgency, and the number of people or systems involved.
The complexity was not only technical. The work itself was unpredictable. Each interaction could unfold differently depending on the customer, the details available, the level of urgency, and the number of people or systems involved.
The complexity was not only technical. The work itself was unpredictable. Each interaction could unfold differently depending on the customer, the details available, the level of urgency, and the number of people or systems involved.
The challenge was to create a product system that improved the workflow rather than simply digitizing the old one. The platform needed to help users move through a web of tasks, information, and decisions with more clarity, while giving product and engineering a stronger foundation for what needed to be built.
The challenge was to create a product system that improved the workflow rather than simply digitizing the old one. The platform needed to help users move through a web of tasks, information, and decisions with more clarity, while giving product and engineering a stronger foundation for what needed to be built.
The challenge was to create a product system that improved the workflow rather than simply digitizing the old one. The platform needed to help users move through a web of tasks, information, and decisions with more clarity, while giving product and engineering a stronger foundation for what needed to be built.
The business risk was adoption.
The
business
risk was
adoption.
The business risk was adoption.
Enterprise partners needed confidence that the platform would create measurable value, not simply ask their teams to change behavior for the sake of using a new tool. Product strategy became critical to making the value of the platform clearer, more tangible, and easier to evaluate.
The work was tied to measurable operational goals, including reducing time to close claims, minimizing non-value-add activities, reducing repair costs, increasing use of preferred repair networks, and lowering dependency on legacy systems.
The business case depended on understanding the real workflow before deciding what the product should become.
The business risk was adoption.
The business risk was adoption.
The business risk was adoption.
Enterprise partners needed confidence that the platform would create measurable value, not simply ask their teams to change behavior for the sake of using a new tool. Product strategy became critical to making the value of the platform clearer, more tangible, and easier to evaluate.
Enterprise partners needed confidence that the platform would create measurable value, not simply ask their teams to change behavior for the sake of using a new tool. Product strategy became critical to making the value of the platform clearer, more tangible, and easier to evaluate.
The work was tied to measurable operational goals, including reducing time to close claims, minimizing non-value-add activities, reducing repair costs, increasing use of preferred repair networks, and lowering dependency on legacy systems.
The work was tied to measurable operational goals, including reducing time to close claims, minimizing non-value-add activities, reducing repair costs, increasing use of preferred repair networks, and lowering dependency on legacy systems.
The business case depended on understanding the real workflow before deciding what the product should become.
The business case depended on understanding the real workflow before deciding what the product should become.
Building the Practice Behind the Product
Building the Practice Behind the Product
Building the Practice Behind the Product
Building the Practice Behind the Product
We began examining the workflow, testing assumptions, and clarifying what the product actually needed to support. This enabled us to create a clearer path between operational need and product direction.
We began examining the workflow, testing assumptions, and clarifying what the product actually needed to support. This enabled us to create a clearer path between operational need and product direction.
We began examining the workflow, testing assumptions, and clarifying what the product actually needed to support. This enabled us to create a clearer path between operational need and product direction.
Building a Strong Foundation
Building a Strong Foundation
Then we focused upstream into research synthesis, which informed workflow definition and information architecture, which tightened our feature strategy. The stronger foundation ultimately helped product, engineering, and leadership. We evaluated ideas earlier, and aligned around what mattered, so we could move forward with more confidence.
Then we focused upstream into research synthesis, which informed workflow definition and information architecture, which tightened our feature strategy. The stronger foundation ultimately helped product, engineering, and leadership. We evaluated ideas earlier, and aligned around what mattered, so we could move forward with more confidence.
Building a Strong Foundation
Then we focused upstream into research synthesis, which informed workflow definition and information architecture, which tightened our feature strategy. The stronger foundation ultimately helped product, engineering, and leadership. We evaluated ideas earlier, and aligned around what mattered, so we could move forward with more confidence.
Building a Strong Foundation
Then we focused upstream into research synthesis, which informed workflow definition and information architecture, which tightened our feature strategy. The stronger foundation ultimately helped product, engineering, and leadership. We evaluated ideas earlier, and aligned around what mattered, so we could move forward with more confidence.
Building a Strong Foundation
Then we focused upstream into research synthesis, which informed workflow definition and information architecture, which tightened our feature strategy. The stronger foundation ultimately helped product, engineering, and leadership. We evaluated ideas earlier, and aligned around what mattered, so we could move forward with more confidence.
A complicated workflow became a platform enterprise partners could understand and trust.
A complicated workflow became a platform enterprise partners could understand and trust.
A complicated workflow became a platform enterprise partners could understand and trust.
A complicated workflow became a platform enterprise partners could understand and trust.
The Service Environment
The Service Environment
The Service Environment
The Service Environment
Since claims did not move through a clean sequence of steps, users were rarely working with complete information to start with. The workflow behaved less like a linear path and more like a web.
Since claims did not move through a clean sequence of steps, users were rarely working with complete information to start with. The workflow behaved less like a linear path and more like a web.
Since claims did not move through a clean sequence of steps, users were rarely working with complete information to start with. The workflow behaved less like a linear path and more like a web.
Shadowing users and mapping scenarios helped reveal where the process broke down. This provided insight into how the product needed to create more support.
Shadowing users and mapping scenarios helped reveal where the process broke down. This provided insight into how the product needed to create more support.
Shadowing users and mapping scenarios helped reveal where the process broke down. This provided insight into how the product needed to create more support.
From Use Case to Product Logic
From Use Case to Product Logic
From Use Case to Product Logic
We focused on shifting from individual features to the larger experience we needed to support, making it easier to see how each decision affected the work around it.
We focused on shifting from individual features to the larger experience we needed to support, making it easier to see how each decision affected the work around it.
We focused on shifting from individual features to the larger experience we needed to support, making it easier to see how each decision affected the work around it.
That structure helped align scope, and the team's workflow. Features were shaped around the real behavior of the service environment, making the product more useful than a digital version of the process it was meant to replace.
That structure helped align scope, and the team's workflow. Features were shaped around the real behavior of the service environment, making the product more useful than a digital version of the process it was meant to replace.
That structure helped align scope, and the team's workflow. Features were shaped around the real behavior of the service environment, making the product more useful than a digital version of the process it was meant to replace.
From Use Case to Product Logic
We focused on shifting from individual features to the larger experience we needed to support, making it easier to see how each decision affected the work around it.
That structure helped align scope, and the team's workflow. Features were shaped around the real behavior of the service environment, making the product more useful than a digital version of the process it was meant to replace.
Every idea begins with a point.
Every idea begins with a point.
Every idea begins
with a point.
Every idea begins with a point.
Every idea begins with a point.
Let’s shape what comes next.
Let’s shape what comes next.
Let’s shape what comes next.
Let’s shape what comes next.
Let’s shape what comes next.
Let’s Chat
©️ 2026 Sacred Dot Studios LLC. All rights reserved.
Design by discipline. Strategy by responsibility.
©️ 2026 Sacred Dot Studios LLC. All rights reserved.
Design by discipline. Strategy by responsibility.
©️ 2026 Sacred Dot Studios LLC. All rights reserved.
Design by discipline. Strategy by responsibility.
The business risk was adoption.
The business risk was adoption.
Enterprise partners needed confidence that the platform would create measurable value, not simply ask their teams to change behavior for the sake of using a new tool. Product strategy became critical to making the value of the platform clearer, more tangible, and easier to evaluate.
The work was tied to measurable operational goals, including reducing time to close claims, minimizing non-value-add activities, reducing repair costs, increasing use of preferred repair networks, and lowering dependency on legacy systems.
The business case depended on understanding the real workflow before deciding what the product should become.