Before any screen gets designed, I want to know why people behave the way they do inside a system, where the friction actually lives, and whether the problem being solved is the real one. That entry point comes from a decade at the intersection of four disciplines, and each one contributes something the others can't.

Behavioral economics^BE gave me the why. People are not irrational, they are responding rationally to the system they are inside. Understanding that changes what you look for in a research session, what you trust in a usability test, and what you build when the diagnosis is done.

Industrial engineering^IE gave me the how. Systems have parts, and the parts interact. A fix in one place creates pressure somewhere else. Designing without that understanding produces solutions that work in isolation and fail in context. I am not designing a fix for today. I am designing something that does not need to be revisited in six months.

Six years of teaching^TL those frameworks to engineers gave me the practice. Explaining a complex idea to someone who has never encountered it before is not a communication skill. It is a design skill. If you cannot make it legible, you do not understand it well enough yet.

UX^UX is where all three become something you can ship. The research, the systems thinking, the translation: they are not separate phases. They happen simultaneously, and the quality of the output depends on holding all of them at once.

What this produces for a team is unusual: someone who can sit with the ambiguous strategic question and produce the specific artifact, who questions assumptions as a professional reflex, and who will tell you when the problem you brought is not the problem worth solving. Not as a provocation. As the job.

I work in English and Spanish, across LatAm and US contexts, and I do my best work in rooms where design, engineering, and business are having different versions of the same conversation. Those rooms are where the real problem usually lives.

Yes, an aesthetic eye and a good sense of humor are also included.

Review Applied Logic (Case Studies) →