Async that actually keeps teams aligned.
An app that equips how retail teams actually work, asynchronously, instead of trying to correct it. Every task keeps its context, its owner and the proof it was done, even as it passes from hand to hand.
AsyncTeamContext
In my team the hours are staggered and people barely cross paths. Selling comes first, so background work is interrupted by customers all day long.
Who it is for : Retail team members and managers working shifted hours
The problem
When a task crosses several people and several interruptions, the task itself is not what gets lost. What disappears is the context, the name of whoever picked it up, and the proof that the work was actually done.
My insight
Async is not a malfunction to fix, it is how these teams genuinely work. A tool that requires everyone to be available at the same time will never get used.
My solution
Two complete journeys. Team members see their tasks, start them, flag a blocker with a comment, attach proof and close them out. Managers create and assign, set priority and deadline, ask for proof, answer blockers and follow the team statistics. Members can also hand tasks to each other directly, with guardrails.
Product hypothesis
If every task carries its own context, owner and status, then the team can stay aligned without ever having to talk in real time.
My role
- Product framing and definition of both journeys
- Domain model: types, reducer, selectors, permissions, statistics
- Mobile-first UX/UI design, richer dashboard on desktop
- Front-end development (React 19, TypeScript)
- Unit, integration and E2E testing
Evidence & quality
- 1 moisPiloted in real conditionsWith my team of 8 people, on the shop floor.
- Two complete journeysTeam member and manager, from task creation to proof of completion. 24 test files.
Key decisions
Team statistics, never an individual ranking
The dashboard tracks on-time completion, median delay, what is blocked and what had to be chased. I wanted to measure how the collective works, not score people. A tool built to monitor always ends up hurting its own adoption.
Trade-offA manager looking for individual tracking will not find it. That is a deliberate choice.
Allow peer-to-peer tasks, with guardrails
Team members already ask each other directly, and banning it in the tool would change nothing. So I framed it instead: the author stays visible, the manager is informed, urgency is flagged and the history is kept.
Stay lighter than a project management tool
The interface gets used standing up, between two customers, on a phone held in one hand. So it is action-oriented and deliberately sparse.
Trade-offFewer planning features and advanced views.
Stack
- React 19
- TypeScript
- Vite
- Tailwind
- React Router
- Radix
- Vitest
- Playwright