← Work
7 min read

Design Leadership · Microsoft Fluent Design System

Before Anyone Touches a Component

16 active kits with no governing taxonomy. 3,800+ product teams building on a foundation that had never been audited. This is the story of how design leadership gets done at scale — the people management, the org change, and the technical architecture, all at once.

Role
Lead — people management, org change, technical architecture
Team
9 designers across cross-squad effort
Timeline
Q4 2024–Q2 2025
Output
9 active kits (down from 16), 102+ refactored components
Platforms
Web · iOS · Android (Fluent Core + Copilot kits)
Impact
3,800+ unique consuming teams
Excel tracker spreadsheet showing component rows with columns for variant counts, reduction percentages, kit assignment, and completion status
The tracker that made the work visible. Before this, no one knew what progress looked like — component by component, kit by kit.

By the numbers

Results

16 → 9

Active kits after consolidation — from fragmented to governed

102+

Components refactored for design-to-code parity

3,800+

Unique consuming teams now designing from an audited foundation

10+

Microsoft brands with systematic theming support

~2 wks

To ship Fluent Theme Designer + community kit under a skip-level escalation

4

Distinct kit categories established and published on the Fluent 2 doc site

Impact

Before & After

Before

16 kits, no taxonomy

No standardized definition of what a "kit" even was. Consuming teams reported confusion about which kit to use, which was current, and how to migrate. No tracking, no metrics, no way to know what progress looked like.

  • 16 active kits across Web, iOS, Android, Copilot surfaces
  • Inconsistent variable naming, outdated components
  • No clear ownership model
  • No process for what "done" meant for a component

After

9 kits, four defined categories

A governing taxonomy published on the Fluent 2 doc site. Every kit mapped to a tier with a distinct role. Design-to-code parity across 102+ components. Copilot surfaces with first-class kit support.

  • Fluent 2 Design Language — styling source of truth
  • Fluent 2 Core UI Kits — code-aligned building blocks
  • Copilot UI Kits — AI-focused components and patterns
  • Labs UI Kits — partner-led experimentation

Background

What Fluent's UI Kits Looked Like Before

Fluent's UI kits had grown without a governing framework. Sixteen active kits spanned Web, iOS, Android, and Copilot surfaces — but there was no standardized definition of what a "kit" even was. Kits had different structures, different naming conventions, different update cadences, and no clear ownership model to make any of it consistent.

The problems were documented in the Fluent 2 refinement brief: inconsistent and outdated components, opaque process, and redundancies at every level. Consuming teams — all 3,800+ of them — were building products on top of a foundation that had never been audited. Some teams reported they were hand-rolling Figma files rather than consuming a Fluent kit because they didn't know which kit was current or whether any of them actually reflected the code.

The Problem

Fluent's UI kits were fragmented, outdated, and ungoverned — and 3,800 product teams were consuming that mess as their design foundation. As Fluent grew, unaddressed inconsistencies compounded. Every new component had to work around the existing mess.

Goal 1

A Governing Taxonomy

The first move was definitional: establish what a Fluent kit is and what category it belongs to. Four distinct categories with explicit roles:

The four categories

Every existing kit was mapped to one of these tiers. Kits with no clear home were candidates for consolidation. The result: 16 active kits compressed to 9.

Goal 2

Design-to-Code Parity

Variable naming and structure were refactored across 102+ components to align Figma variable names exactly to code token names. Before: designers and engineers used different terminology for the same values. After: the same term appears in the Figma variables panel and in the codebase — no translation layer, no lookup table needed.

The refactor also improved Figma file performance directly. Fewer variants, cleaner variable resolution, less redundancy — files that had been slow to open and navigate became usable again as daily design tools.

"It is rare to find a peer subject matter expert on tokens who is equally fluent in how those decisions translate into Figma variables, and you absolutely excel in that space. That combination of token architecture, variable logic, system implementation, and product reality is hard to find — especially at Microsoft's scale."

Farhan Mian, Senior Designer · Peer review, 2026

Goal 3

Systematic Brand Theming

One of the most significant structural changes was how brand theming worked. Before: teams who needed brand customization (for Microsoft sub-brands like Excel, Loop, OneNote, or Word) duplicated the variables platform file and maintained their own fork. This was unsustainable — each fork diverged over time, and there was no path back.

After: a systematic theming approach where brand overrides connect to the core file rather than forking it. Updating the core propagates to every brand — teams get the latest without maintaining their own copy. And the Copilot UI Kits can now switch between Fluent 2 and Copilot styles at the library level, meaning teams building AI experiences don't need separate files.

The stress test

Two Weeks, Two Deliverables, Under Escalation

The real test of the refactoring work arrived as a last-minute escalation. An external partnership request came in — someone asked the direct manager, who declined (not a priority). It escalated to the skip-level, who overrode the call and made the team ship it.

The team delivered in approximately two weeks:

Microsoft Fluent 2 Web — Community Kit

An external community kit published to Figma Community — giving any designer outside Microsoft access to Fluent 2 components. Not a simplified version. The actual kit, publicly available.

Fluent Theme Designer — Figma Plugin

A Figma plugin (also published to Figma Community) that lets any external brand apply their own color identity to Fluent components. It uses color science to generate consistent, accessible color scales — brand theming that's systematic, not manual. A major airline brand applied their brand colors through the plugin to Fluent components; the result shipped as a themed external kit.

The two-week turnaround was only possible because the architecture was already sound. A refactored variable system, a defined kit taxonomy, and a systematic theming approach meant there was no foundational work left to do — just execution. The mess from before would have made this impossible under that timeline.

Process

Making 9 Designers Move as One

  1. 01

    Introduced the tracker

    Built an Excel-based tracker to bring visibility to what existed and what progress looked like — component by component, kit by kit, with variant counts, reduction percentages, and status. Before the tracker, there was no way to know what was done, what was in progress, or where overlap was happening. The tracker was a cultural shift, not just a tool.

  2. 02

    Ran structured reviews

    Show-and-Tell sessions gave the team a rhythm for sharing progress, surfacing blockers, and keeping the work visible to leadership. Structure without bureaucracy — enough process to keep 9 designers aligned without bottlenecking on one reviewer.

  3. 03

    Created standardized templates

    Standardized component templates established a shared scaffold for component structure. With a template, individual component decisions happened within a defined system — consistency came from the structure, not from chasing it across 9 separate workstreams.

  4. 04

    Defined ownership per component and kit section

    Every component and kit section had a named owner. Overlap didn't happen because it couldn't — if you owned it, it was yours to ship. Accountability was the mechanism that let 9 designers work in parallel without producing duplicate output.

  5. 05

    Shipped the migration path

    Published the new kit structure on the Fluent 2 doc site with guidance for consuming teams — not just a new file to switch to, but documentation of what changed, why, and how to migrate. The work was codified, not just done.

Leadership

What Made This Work

This case study has three concurrent leadership angles running through it: managing people, driving org change, and making technical architecture decisions. Those three things aren't usually in the same job description, but they were inseparable here.

Measurement where none existed

The Excel tracker was the most important thing I built. Before it, there was no way to know what progress looked like. After it, every designer could see their work's relationship to the whole — and leadership could see whether the project was on track without a status meeting. Introducing measurement changed the way the team worked.

Defining what "done" meant

The unblocking move wasn't a design decision. It was establishing clear definitions: what counts as a P0 component, what "refactored" means, what the acceptance criteria are for a kit to be published. Without those definitions, everyone was making individual judgment calls and no one could agree on whether anything was finished. With them, the team could make progress because they all knew when to stop.

Delivering under escalation pressure

When a skip-level override turned a "no" into a two-week deadline, the team shipped both the community kit and the brand-theming plugin on time. This is the most honest evidence that the foundation was sound. A two-week turnaround on two public-facing deliverables is only possible if there's no structural work left to do — and there wasn't, because the refactor was already done.

"Great systems thinkers don't just design components — they design momentum."

Jason Custer, Manager · Connect review, April 2025

"When I first chatted with Karlee when I started, I knew that she was someone that I was excited to work and collaborate with. Having gotten that chance, she has become someone that has made some of the whiplash aspects of some of the work we do less painful and more productive. Karlee is someone that I know that I can trust and depend on."

Jack Zankowski, Principal Product Design Manager · Peer review, 2024

Looking ahead

What's Next