From Ad Hoc to Human

Humanizing Microcopy in a Manufacturing Execution System

Mismatched Microcopy

When I joined MTEK, I found that there were no UX writing guidelines. As a result, developers wrote microcopy with varying styles and tones, often on the fly while developing new features and functions.

This inconsistency in microcopy created an interface that sometimes used overly technical language, was at times too brief, or featured awkward phrasing.

While the microcopy worked functionally, its inconsistency increased user confusion and uncertainty, adding friction to the experience.

In a complex manufacturing system, clear and precise microcopy is essential. Even minor confusion during tasks like submitting a form or handling errors can lead to lost time and money on the production floor.

My goal was to create microcopy that was consistent, clear, and human, guiding users to make tasks easier and the interface less intimidating.

Audit and analysis

I started by reviewing existing microcopy across key user flows, such as buttons, form labels, tooltips, and system messages, to identify inconsistencies in tone, phrasing, and terminology.

Solution

I took the initiative to audit the system, identify problem areas, and rewrite key pieces of microcopy using UX writing best practices.

My focus was on making actions clearer, removing fluff, and making our microcopy more consistent across the whole system, reducing the cognitive load on users!

Impact

The team had a lot of priorities in motion, so I asked if I could pick up this microcopy thread myself to help bring more clarity to our users.

While some changes might seem small, they made a difference:

QA and developers reported fewer questions about unclear UI text,
Support noted that users were making fewer mistakes in areas that previously triggered errors.

The work also helped establish early momentum for more intentional UX writing within the team.

Some of the patterns I introduced, like clearer error messages and verb-first CTAs, are now being used across the system and new features!

Last but not least, things look better and more polished!

Reflection

This project reminded me that users don’t always tell you that they're confused, even if they are!

And to be fair, our old microcopy wasn't technically incorrect, it just needed some UX improvements.

UX writing is easy to overlook. This is in part because when things work well, we barely notice them. However, that’s exactly why it matters. Thoughtful microcopy reduces friction before it becomes a problem and makes a problem easier to solve if it does happen.

If I could do this project again, I’d advocate for lightweight user testing or internal reviews to validate copy changes even further.

I also made a lightweight microcopy guide that the dev team can use if they want!