Projects | Junho Choi

01 Mobile app · Research to product

Braven Connect

Braven assumed students wanted more career information. Our research showed they wanted a clear next step and direct, 1:1 contact — so we designed the mobile app around a personalised career roadmap, from wireframes to six production-ready screens.

Role: UI/UX Consultant · TODO — what you owned
Timeline: Jan – May 2025
Team: 8 consultants · Berkeley Consulting Collaborative
Tools: Figma, FigJam, survey analysis

Mobile UIUX ResearchPersonasFigma

At a glance

From “more information” to “a clear next step”

Client: Braven, a career-readiness nonprofit for students at public universities
Challenge: Braven believed students needed more career information. We tested that assumption.
My part: TODO — 1 sentence on what YOU owned, e.g. “led the class-year split and designed the Roadmap + My Tasks screens”
Delivered: 4 class-year personas and 6 production-ready mobile screens in Figma
Result: TODO — what Braven did with it, or a number

Braven Connect — final high-fidelity mobile screens

The insight

Braven assumed students needed more career information. They didn’t. Students picked virtual events because they were short on time — and what they actually wanted was direct, 1:1 contact with mentors and employers, with needs that changed sharply by class year.

Research · Jan – Mar 2025

One survey, four very different students

We surveyed undergraduates at public four-year universities, charted the responses, and affinity-mapped them in FigJam. One general persona proved too coarse to design for, so we split the data by class year. Three findings shaped everything after:

Time is the barrier. Convenience was overwhelmingly why students chose virtual events at all.
They want the outcome, not the homework. Students wanted the end result but lacked the steps to get there.
Needs shift by year. First- and second-years need direction and low-pressure contact; third- and fourth-years want resume help and direct access to employers.

TODO — your part of the research, e.g. which cohort or analysis you led

Decision 01

Lead with a roadmap, not a content feed

Because students “want the result but lack the steps,” the app opens on a personalised Career Roadmap and My Tasks — a short list of next actions — instead of a feed of events and videos. A short Career Questionnaire sets the roadmap, so one app serves all four class years.

Trade-off: TODO — what you considered and rejected, and what this choice cost

Braven low-fidelity wireframes — Student Roadmap, Events, Past Videos, Home

Decision 02

Point every screen toward a person

Every cohort ranked 1:1 contact above more information. The Events calendar and Braven Connect speaker library are built to lead students to a mentor, speaker, or employer they can actually reach — fewer webinars, more people.

Trade-off: TODO — check this matches the real design, then add the trade-off

Braven high-fidelity mockups — Welcome, Braven Connect, Events, Career Questionnaire

Iteration · Apr – May 2025

Structure first, then brand

We tested the information architecture and navigation with the Braven team as grey-and-purple wireframes before any visual design. Only then did we apply Braven’s navy, coral and butter-yellow brand to the approved flows.

What changed: TODO — 1–2 things Braven’s feedback changed between lo-fi and hi-fi

TODO — before / after of one screen

Outcome & reflection

Delivered four class-year personas and six production-ready screens to Braven.

TODO — what Braven adopted or built next, or any metric

What I’d do differently: put a clickable prototype in front of a few students from each class year before hand-off. We validated the structure with Braven’s team, but never with students themselves.

01 / 07

02 Browser extension · Research to UI

Mozilla Firefox

Researched how people feel about trading performance for battery life, then designed and built a Firefox extension that makes tab memory and CPU use visible.

Role: IT Consultant (research & UI)
Timeline: Aug 2025 – Feb 2026
Team: 12 consultants · Invention Corps of Berkeley
Tools: Figma, FigJam, React, Vite

User ResearchSurvey DesignFigmaReactVite

The problem

Firefox wanted to explore an Adaptive Performance mode that throttles idle tabs. The open questions: do users care about eco features, what would convince them, and how much speed would they give up for battery?

Phase 01 · Aug 2025

Project framing — Adaptive Performance

Started from a hypothesis: most browsers waste battery on idle tabs, and Firefox could differentiate with an Adaptive Performance mode that intelligently throttles based on usage. Defined the open questions we’d need to answer with users: do they care about eco features, what data would convince them, and how much performance loss is acceptable in exchange for battery gain?

Phase 02 · Sep 2025 (Week 1)

Survey question brainstorm

The 12-person team filled a FigJam board with raw interview/survey question candidates — each consultant contributing from their angle. Questions ranged from blunt (“why do you prefer your browser over Firefox?”) to specific (“if you could save 10% battery at the cost of significantly laggier performance, would you?”).

Phase 03 · Sep 2025

Categorize into themes

Grouped the brainstorm into five working buckets that became the spine of the eventual questionnaire:

Background / Demographics — age, browser of choice, hardware, power-user level
Eco Qs — environmental motivation, willingness to trade speed for sustainability
Power Qs — current habits around tab sleeping, low-power modes, memory awareness
Convenience Qs — 1-click vs. customizable, visibility preferences for feature output
Extensions — how integrated browser extensions are into the user’s daily flow

Mozilla — categorized question clusters (Eco / Power / Convenience / Background)

Phase 04 · Oct 2025

Survey structuring

Pressure-tested the brainstorm against eight guiding criteria — purpose, target audience, question types, clarity, flow/logic, scalability, time-to-complete, and ethics. The result: a coherent survey that flows from general to specific, mixes qualitative and quantitative items, and stays under a respondent-friendly length.

Mozilla — Guiding Questions framework (8 criteria)

Phase 05 · Oct – Nov 2025

Final survey assembly & distribution

Consolidated the brainstorm into a clean, multi-section instrument: Background Screening, Eco-Conscious Preferences, Power-user Questions, Extensions, Browser Usage & Experience, and Final Questions. Distributed across the team’s networks; collected enough responses to read both broad signals and edge cases.

Mozilla — final structured survey (Background / Eco / Power / Extensions)

Phase 06 · Dec 2025 – Feb 2026

Build — tab-performance extension

Took the survey insights into engineering. Built a Firefox extension in React + Vite that tracks 50+ concurrent tabs in real time and lets users filter and sort by memory and CPU usage — the “visibility” signal the survey identified as the missing piece in current eco-mode UIs. Designed the UI in Figma with the 12-person team split across frontend and backend tracks.

Mozilla — final survey + Adaptive Performance question set

Outcome & reflection

TODO — survey response count, key findings, extension screens / demo

01 / 08

03 Interactive installation · Spatial UX

Urban Conga

Designed a data-informed public installation system that measures how people actually use civic, park, and commercial spaces — from behavioral survey to Rhino layout.

Role: UX Design Consultant
Timeline: Jan – Jun 2026
Team: 9 consultants · Invention Corps of Berkeley
Tools: Rhino 3D, FigJam, survey analysis

UX ResearchData SchemasRhino 3DSpatial Design

The problem

Urban Conga’s installations had no way to show how people engaged with them. The goal: capture real usage patterns with low-cost sensing, without making people uncomfortable in public.

Phase 01 · Jan – Feb 2026

Public-space behavioral survey

Built and distributed a survey across the team’s networks asking people how they actually use civic squares, parks, and commercial spaces — group size, time of day, length of stay, deal-breakers, and what they’d feel comfortable doing in public. The goal: capture real behavior, not assumptions, before any installation design started.

Phase 02 · Feb 2026

Insight extraction

Each of the 9 consultants was asked to surface 2–3 patterns from the survey responses. The themes that emerged immediately:

Almost everyone visits public spaces in groups of 3–5 people
Overcrowding, cleanliness, and noise are the top deal-breakers
People are uncomfortable with anything they’re unaware of — but much more relaxed once they understand what an installation is doing
Behavior splits into two distinct modes: quick passers-by (15–30 min) and extended visitors (1+ hour)

Urban Conga — insight sticky notes per consultant

Phase 03 · Feb – Mar 2026

Space-type segmentation

The team recognized that one installation concept can’t cover every context. We grouped responses into three space archetypes — each with its own usage signature, mood, and core values:

Civic spaces — 2 hours, 2–5 people, productive at noon/night, valuing education, focus, and sightseeing
Park spaces — 30 min–1 hour, relaxation-focused, valuing exercise, stress relief, quiet, and friends
Commercial spaces — 1–2 hours, productive at noon/night, social and purchase-driven

Urban Conga — space type breakdown cards (Civic / Park / Commercial)

Phase 04 · Mar 2026

Concept ideation

Each space archetype got its own installation direction. The brainstorm produced a long-list of physical and digital interaction concepts matched to the space’s mood:

Litter walls, locks, etching/scratching — permanence and trace-leaving in civic spaces
Infrared sensing & AI cluster detection — measuring how long and how many, depending on context
Touch / pressure / button voting — e.g. a Starbucks “Strawberry Acái vs. Caramel Macchiato first to 100” in a mall
Material wear-and-tear over time — the installation visibly changes from use
Sticker walls / community blurbs, kinetic park installations, racing/climbing micro-games

Urban Conga — installation concept ideation

Phase 05 · Apr 2026

Sensing & data-schema constraints

Translated the qualitative behavioral goals (“measure dwell time,” “count cluster size,” “detect voluntary engagement”) into structured, quantifiable data schemas with low-cost, low-overhead sensing approaches — capacitive touch, IR proximity, simple pressure switches.

Phase 06 · May – Jun 2026

Spatial & 3D layout in Rhino

Modeled candidate installation footprints in Rhino 3D, validating that each layout could host the inferred data flows from phase 5 while staying within the budget and footprint of a real public space. Closed the loop between behavior → sensing → physical form.

Urban Conga — installation reference + Rhino layout area

Outcome & reflection

TODO — final concept, Rhino renders, what Urban Conga took forward

01 / 08

모먹

04 Personal product · Web app

Momuk

오늘 뭐 먹지 — a menu suggester that answers what to eat, not where. It reads weather, air quality and time of day, scores 126 hand-tagged dishes, and shows the top reasons for its pick.

Role: Solo — design & build
Timeline: Aug 2026
Team: Personal project
Tools: HTML, CSS, JavaScript

Product DesignWeb AppRecommendation

The problem

TODO — the problem / why you built it

Phase 01 · TODO — dates

TODO — phase title

TODO — what you did, why, and what you learned

image / screen

Phase 02 · TODO — dates

TODO — phase title

TODO — what you did, why, and what you learned

image / screen

Phase 03 · TODO — dates

TODO — phase title

TODO — what you did, why, and what you learned

image / screen

Phase 04 · TODO — dates

TODO — phase title

TODO — what you did, why, and what you learned

image / screen

Outcome & reflection

TODO — final screens, live link, what you would change

01 / 06

GitHub ↗

Replate

05 Data dashboard · Product design

Replate

Analyzing Replate’s large-scale user data to design and build a website dashboard used by both donors and the company.

Role: TODO — role
Timeline: TODO — dates
Team: Invention Corps of Berkeley
Tools: TODO — tools

DashboardData VizProduct Design

The problem

TODO — the problem / users (donors vs. Replate team)

Phase 01 · TODO — dates

TODO — phase title

TODO — what you did, why, and what you learned

image / screen

Phase 02 · TODO — dates

TODO — phase title

TODO — what you did, why, and what you learned

image / screen

Phase 03 · TODO — dates

TODO — phase title

TODO — what you did, why, and what you learned

image / screen

Phase 04 · TODO — dates

TODO — phase title

TODO — what you did, why, and what you learned

image / screen

Outcome & reflection

TODO — dashboard screens, impact

01 / 06