Chemistry trains you to distrust an outcome you can't explain if a reaction works, you need to know why, or you can't reproduce it. I carried that instinct into product design almost by accident, and it's shaped every project since: I don't trust a good number unless I can point to the decision that produced it.

That's mostly what my work has been for the last 6+ years going into companies where the product is growing faster than the design function supporting it, and closing that gap. Sometimes that's meant building a component library so a team stops re-solving the same button for the fifth time. Sometimes it's meant sitting with a compliance team long enough to understand why a "simple" flow legally can't be simple. The common thread across Africhange, Alerzo, MBiller, and Mzuri across African and Canadian markets isn't the industry. It's usually this same gap between what the product has become and what the design practice around it was built to handle.

I'm as comfortable owning a project solo, start to finish, as I am running a team of designers through one mentorship has ended up being a bigger part of my last few roles than I expected going in, and it's the part I'd be least willing to give up.

The chemistry habit that's stuck around the longest: I write down the reasoning behind a design decision at the time I make it, not after. It's saved me more than once when a decision got questioned six months later, and I could point to exactly why it was made instead of reconstructing a justification from memory.

Based in Nigeria. Open to relocation, hybrid, or remote roles across Europe (NL, IE, DE, SE), the UK, and North America.