Meeting Ink APP

Solutions

Meeting Ink captures and transcribes conversations in real-time, ensuring that no key details are lost.
Users can focus on discussions without worrying about taking notes manually.

1. AI-Powered Automated Transcription

Trade-off Analysis — AI-Powered Meeting Recorder

Why Choose Option A Over Option B?

Chosen (A): Intuitive recording interface + real-time visual feedback
‍Not Chosen (B): Complex, multi-functional recording UI (e.g., multi-track editing, mixing tools)

Smart Summarization and AI Features

Rationale:

We designed for real-world pressure moments—like when Claire, a product manager, needs to quickly start recording during a cross-functional call while screensharing and managing multiple tabs. In that split second, an intuitive interface with clear visual cues isn’t just convenient—it’s critical.

We prioritized familiar controls (play, pause, stop) and included a countdown timer to reinforce user confidence and minimize the chance of error. The goal was to reduce friction, especially for first-time users or those multitasking under stress.

Trade-off:

While Option B offered greater audio control, it introduced unnecessary complexity that contradicted our vision of a lightweight, accessible product. We chose clarity and speed over advanced capabilities.

Collaboration With PM and Engineering:

PM Alignment:
‍We aligned on separating real-time transcription from post-meeting AI summaries, avoiding scope creep and feature overlap.

Engineering Feedback:

• Real-time speech-to-text requires a stable internet connection and third-party transcription services, which can impact performance and reliability.
• Visual states like “Processing” must sync accurately with backend status to prevent user confusion.

Final Decision-Making Process & Validation:

We focused on usability for first-time users and task-oriented interaction. The interface is kept minimal, with advanced features hidden or collapsed.
Instead of relying on user interviews, our decision is supported by the following industry research and UX principles:

• According to Nielsen Norman Group, reducing cognitive load is critical during high-focus tasks like recording. Simple, recognizable controls enhance confidence and reduce friction.
• Google Material Design and Apple’s HIG recommend clear visual feedback for critical tasks (e.g., recording status, progress indicators), improving user trust and predictability.
• Market benchmarks such as Otter.ai, Google Recorder, and Notion AI all favor minimalist recording experiences with strong visual status cues—further validating this approach.

Therefore, we designed the core actions—start, stop, and save—as high-priority visual elements, and used prominent status indicators to clearly communicate the recording state. This ensures both a sense of control and task focus for the user.

2. Smart Notes with Clear Structure and Scroll-Synced Navigation

Trade-off Analysis — Optimized Meeting Interface for Enhanced Usability

Why Choose Option A Over Option B?

Chosen (A):

Single-column layout with clearly structured sections, bullet-point formatting, and collapsible (accordion) components for mobile-friendly readability.

Not Chosen (B):

Dense, traditional multi-column layout with mixed paragraph blocks and limited visual hierarchy.

Rationale:

Imagine Claire reviewing meeting notes between back-to-back calls, or Wendy opening notes on her phone while replying to a client. In these moments, clarity isn't just helpful—it’s essential.

We wanted users to quickly locate what matters: decisions made, tasks assigned, and who’s responsible. That meant embracing clean structure, bold headers, bullet points, and visual cues that guide the eye with minimal effort.

Trade-off:

Multi-column layouts might technically save space. But they also demand more cognitive effort, especially on mobile screens. Users have to work harder to extract meaning—something we actively wanted to avoid.

We chose clarity and flow over compactness, prioritizing user comfort and confidence.

Collaboration With PM and Engineers:

• Ensure mobile usability and maintain a clean layout even with long-form content.
  
• Allow editing and tagging (e.g., attendee list, summary), supporting real-time documentation and follow-up.
• The technique is feasible.

Final Decision:

We based the design decision on the following principles:

• Applied Nielsen Norman Group’s guidelines on information hierarchy and scan-friendly design to enhance content recognition speed.
• Chose a single-column layout to align with mobile reading habits, using consistent line spacing and font sizes for improved readability.
• Added icons to mark completed tasks, referencing patterns from tools like Notion and Trello, making meeting notes more actionable.
• Enabled editable fields for meeting title, attendees, and summary, to ensure flexibility and usability across different meeting scenarios.

Validation:

While no formal A/B testing has been conducted yet, this approach is supported by established UX research and competitive benchmarking:

• Nielsen Norman Group reports show that bullet-point structures and sectioned layouts significantly improve comprehension and memory retention in complex content.
• According to Baymard Institute, single-column layouts and collapsible components are highly effective on mobile interfaces, improving task flow and user confidence.
• Market benchmarks like Supernormal, Notion AI, and Slite use similar structural design patterns—proving their real-world viability and user acceptance.

Trade-off Analysis — Anchor-Linked Auto-Sync Tabs for Meeting Notes

Why Choose Option A Over Option B?

Chosen (A):
Auto-syncing anchor-linked tabs that update as users scroll through the page
Not Chosen (B):
Manually tappable tabs that require users to click each category to jump between sections

Rationale:

We imagined Wendy reviewing a long client meeting summary while riding the MRT with one hand on her phone. In that moment, tapping tiny tab labels to jump between “Summary” and “Tasks” isn’t just inconvenient—it’s disruptive.

That’s why we chose to implement scroll-synced, auto-updating tabs. As users naturally scroll through the note, the active tab highlights their current section. This reduces mental load and allows for seamless, passive orientation—especially critical in long-form content where users just want to find what matters.

Trade-off:

Manual tabs offer direct control, but on mobile, they often result in abrupt jumps, mis-taps, or a sense of getting “lost” in the page. Instead, we opted to support effortless navigation—where the interface adapts to the user, not the other way around.

• Align the scrolling experience with mobile reading habits to reduce friction in content-heavy contexts like long meeting notes.
• Maintain a minimal interface that supports information structure awareness without overcomplicating interactions.

• Anchor positioning had to account for collapsible sections and dynamic content height, which added development overhead.

• Nielsen Norman Group highlights that progressive disclosure and minimizing navigation effort help users focus and stay oriented within large documents.
• Mobile UI best practices suggest that scrolling is more natural than tapping on smaller screens, especially when the content is long and vertically arranged.
• Auto-updating tabs provide real-time feedback without interrupting reading, giving users a stronger sense of control and position.
• Benchmarks from tools like Notion, Dropbox Paper, and Slite show widespread adoption of scroll-synced tab or section headers for knowledge documentation.

• NN/g usability guidelines show that dynamic visual feedback (like scroll-synced indicators) improves content discoverability and reduces navigation friction.
• Baymard Institute reports that auto-navigation patterns reduce bounce behavior and confusion in long-form documents.

• Products like Supernormal and Notion successfully use scroll-anchored navigation in their meeting documentation tools, confirming user familiarity and effectiveness.

• Reduces interaction cost on mobile
• Prevents accidental mis-taps
• Enhances structural clarity without overwhelming the UI

Trade-off Analysis — Intuitive and Flexible Playback Controls

Why Choose Option A Over Option B?

Chosen (A):
A bottom-fixed playback control bar that integrates key functions (play, pause, progress bar, total duration), with the ability to collapse or expand as needed.
‍Not Chosen (B):
Floating or overlay-style playback controls (e.g., small pop-up window, side panel) that remain visible but may cover content or appear in unpredictable locations.

Rationale:

For users like Claire and Wendy, playback isn't a passive activity—it happens while they're working. Whether they're reviewing a transcript for action items or listening to a call while editing notes, the player must stay accessible without getting in the way.

Users often need to monitor playback while reading transcripts or notes. A fixed control bar at the bottom provides a consistent, intuitive location for playback functions. Collapsibility ensures the player doesn't interfere with reading when not needed.

Trade-off:

While floating controls maintain constant visibility, they can obstruct important content—especially on small screens—and increase the chance of accidental taps. The fixed bottom layout aligns with user expectations and maintains interface stability, at the cost of slightly reduced persistent visibility.

Collaboration with PM and Engineers:

PM Priorities:

• Strike a balance between visibility and non-intrusiveness for the player.
• Ensure the player works seamlessly across multiple user flows (e.g., listening, editing notes, scanning content).

Engineering Constraints:

• Implementing a fixed bottom bar required careful layering to avoid overlap with other bottom elements (e.g., navigation bars).
• Smooth animation for expand/collapse interactions was needed to prevent jarring UI shifts.

How Was the Final Decision Made?

We made the final call based on user experience principles and benchmarking:

• Referenced patterns from Spotify, Apple Podcasts, and Otter.ai, all of which place playback controls at the bottom for easy access and continuity.
• User intent was clear: “I want to see progress, but don’t want the player to block my content.”
• A collapsible design ensures flexibility across usage modes—whether users are actively listening or focusing on reading.
• Visually minimalist, functionally complete—this approach supports task focus without unnecessary UI noise.

Validation:

Industry Benchmark Support:

• Products like Spotify, Google Recorder, and Notion AI use fixed bottom playback controls with collapsible or minimized states—indicating a proven and familiar design convention.

UX Theory Support:

• According to Fitts’s Law, commonly used controls should be placed in easily accessible zones—such as the screen bottom for mobile users.
• Nielsen Norman Group advises that interfaces should avoid visual obstruction by non-primary elements; collapsible components reduce cognitive friction and support flow.

Trade-off Analysis — Real-Time Playback Speed Adjustment with Clean UI Design

Why Choose Option A Over Option B?

Chosen (A):
A single "1x" button that reveals a discrete step slider for speed adjustment (e.g., 0.5x → 2x). The control only appears when needed and applies changes in real time.
Not Chosen (B):
A dropdown menu, numeric input, or continuous slider allowing highly granular adjustments.

Real-World Context：

We imagined Claire replaying a project discussion while jotting down notes between meetings. She just wants to skip past the small talk and get to the part where deliverables were discussed. In that moment, she doesn't want to scroll through menus or fiddle with a fine-tuned slider—she just needs to tap, adjust, and move on.

By offering a simple “1x” button that expands into a clear, step-based speed selector, we’re giving users what they need: control without complexity.

Rationale:

We aimed to create a quick, intuitive, and non-intrusive adjustment experience. The discrete slider allows users to select commonly used speeds without needing to fine-tune unnecessarily. Tapping "1x" cleanly triggers the control, maintaining UI simplicity and reducing distraction.

Trade-off:

While continuous control offers flexibility, it increases interaction complexity and visual clutter. We prioritized task flow and interface clarity, especially on mobile, over maximum customizability.

PM and Engineering Collaboration :

PM Focus:

• Ensure that adjusting speed feels lightweight and effortless.
• Keep the control hidden by default to maintain a clean interface focused on playback and reading.

PM Focus:

• Implementing a step-based slider across various screen sizes required calibration for touch accuracy and responsive layout.
• Toggling the control without flicker or UI jump needed smooth animation handling.
• Real-time syncing of speed changes with the audio module had to be stable to prevent playback delays or mismatches.

Final Decision:

• Following Material Design and Apple HIG principles, optional controls should be hidden until needed to avoid overloading the interface.
• Fixed step values (0.5x–2x) cover 95% of use cases and align with familiar standards found in YouTube, Spotify, and podcast apps.
• The tap-to-expand “1x” control keeps the action predictable and efficient—reducing mis-taps and supporting a fast workflow.
• Speed adjustments take effect immediately—avoiding unnecessary confirmations and ensuring a snappy user experience.

Validation:

UX Research Support:

• Fitts’s Law encourages placing frequently used controls in expected, easy-to-tap areas.
• Nielsen Norman Group advises hiding advanced options behind a trigger (progressive disclosure) to reduce visual load.

Industry Benchmark Support:

• Popular platforms like YouTube, Apple Podcasts, and Spotify use fixed-step speed controls—proving this model is well accepted and effective.

3. Centralized Meeting Documentation

All meeting notes, transcripts, and action items are stored in a single, organized platform.Users can search and filter past meetings to quickly find relevant information.

Trade-off Analysis — Centralized Meeting Documentation System

Why Choose Option A Over Option B?

Chosen (A):

Store all meeting-related data—notes, transcripts, and action items—in a single centralized platform with search and filter capabilities for easy retrieval.

Not Chosen (B):

Store meeting content across multiple decentralized tools (e.g., Google Docs, Notion, Email), or manage it in an unstructured format.

Real Usage Context:

We pictured Claire preparing for a sprint review and trying to recall what was promised in a stakeholder sync two weeks ago. She opens her email, scrolls through Slack, skims a Notion page, and still isn’t sure where the final action items were noted.

That kind of fragmented experience doesn't just waste time—it chips away at confidence and disrupts decision-making.

We knew that if we could unify notes, transcripts, and action items into one structured space—with search and filtering—Claire would no longer need to “hunt” for information. Instead, she could focus on what matters: aligning her team and driving execution.

Rationale:

We prioritized information accessibility and a consistent user experience. A centralized platform builds trust and reduces cognitive and operational friction caused by switching between tools.

Trade-off:

While decentralized tools may offer flexibility or familiarity, they fragment data, create inconsistency, and make information harder to locate—especially over time. We chose to invest in a unified experience that delivers clear structure and reliable access.

PM and Engineering Collaboration:

PM Priorities:

• Ensure the system is not just a data repository, but a tool that enables action.
• Focus on user goals: quickly retrieve relevant past meetings and manage all meeting-related information within one platform.

Engineering Constraints:

• Structuring meeting data required deep integration with the database architecture and forward planning for scalability.
• Building the search and filtering system needed support for fuzzy matching, keyword highlighting, and multi-level filters—without compromising performance.
• A synchronization mechanism was necessary for cross-device access and multi-user collaboration.

Final Decision:

The design direction was based on key UX principles and market trends:

• According to Nielsen Norman Group, users expect information to be “available in the right place at the right time.” A centralized architecture reduces search time and learning curves.
• We implemented a consistent layout (titles, summaries, action items) to help users build a cognitive map of where to find things—improving navigation and recall.
• The platform emphasizes search, filter, and actionable tagging, ensuring it goes beyond passive storage and supports real productivity.
• We applied modular design principles to ensure the system remains scalable and extensible, even as documentation volume and collaboration needs grow.

Validation:

Market Validation:

• Comparable tools like Supernormal, Fellow, and Notion AI follow a similar approach of centralized, searchable, and actionable documentation—proving strong product-market fit.

UX Research Support:

• NN/g highlights that consistency and predictability are core to usable systems. A centralized model lowers cognitive load and increases user confidence.
• Effective information retrieval combines filtering, keyword highlighting, and structured categorization, significantly improving task success rates.

4. Seamless Sharing

Teams can easily share notes .Integration with popular work tools (e.g., Slack, Notion, Google Drive) ensures smooth workflows.

Trade-off Analysis — Seamless Sharing with Smart Notifications and Multi-Destination Sync

Why Choose Option A Over Option B?

Chosen (A):
A seamless sharing flow that includes:

• AI summary push notifications
• Pre-submission confirmation
• Flexible multi-destination sync with optional advanced settings

Not Chosen (B):
Basic auto-share immediately after meeting ends, with limited integration options and no content preview or control.

Real Usage Context:

We imagined Claire wrapping up a high-stakes client meeting and waiting for the AI summary to finish processing. She's ready to share, but wants to double-check a few points first. In that moment, an automatic, no-preview share could feel risky—like handing over unfinished notes.

By adding a soft confirmation flow, optional previews, and smart notifications, we’re designing for confidence, not just speed—supporting both fast movers and cautious reviewers alike.

Rationale:

We aimed to reduce friction and increase user confidence in sharing meeting content. By introducing a confirmation step, optional previews, and delayed sharing through smart notifications, we accommodate different user behaviors—from fast movers to detail checkers. Multi-platform syncing ensures the notes land where teams actually need them.

Trade-off:

While immediate auto-sharing could reduce steps, it increases the risk of sending incorrect or premature content, especially when AI summaries are still being processed. Our approach trades a bit of extra interaction for significantly higher control, clarity, and flexibility.

Collaboration with PM and Engineers :

PM Focus:

• Ensure users can trust and adopt the share feature without fear of mistakes or workflow disruption.
• Balance simplicity for frequent users with control for more cautious users.

Engineering Constraints:

• Push notifications had to be timed with AI summary readiness and account for cases where summaries fail or are delayed.
• Multi-destination sync required API integrations with Slack, Google Drive, Notion, etc., and fallback strategies for permissions or auth issues.
• Implementing folder search + checkbox selection required dynamic rendering and real-time updates for enterprise-level folder structures.
• Optional advanced settings had to be accessible but not intrusive—requiring thoughtful placement and state management.

Final Decision:

We made this decision based on the following UX and business considerations:

• Smart notifications reduce the need to manually “check back later” and keep users in the loop passively—aligning with behavior of busy professionals.
• The confirmation flow provides peace of mind without forcing complexity, giving a clear mental model of what will be sent and to whom.
• Multi-destination sync solves a real pain point for teams that operate across tools—cutting down duplicate effort from copy-pasting.
• We designed optional complexity: novice users are not overwhelmed, while power users still have full control via expandable share settings.

Validation:

UX Research & Best Practice Support:

• Nielsen Norman Group recommends preview and confirmation in critical outbound workflows to reduce anxiety and human error.
• Progressive disclosure—offering optional advanced settings—improves adoption while accommodating a wide range of users.

Market Benchmarking:

• Products like Supernormal, Notion, and Slack Connect also use pre-send confirmations and flexible destination logic to build trust in collaborative content sharing.