Turning payer transparency data into negotiation intelligence.

A rate has no strategic meaning in isolation. Provider finance and managed-care teams needed to compare their own contracted rates with a relevant market across payers, service lines, billing codes, facilities, and provider organizations.

The design challenge was to make that multidimensional comparison legible without flattening away the evidence that made it trustworthy.

V1 used a heat map to surface areas above and below the market average. Expandable rows connected each signal to its billing codes, the organization’s average rate, the market average, and individual provider entities.

This established the core interaction model: an executive could scan for opportunity while an analyst could open the same view to validate the comparison.

After V1, I explored a guided creation flow that separated the hardest decisions: identify the reference organization, define a comparison market, choose payers, and select service lines.

These concepts were design explorations and were not implemented. They show how the team investigated a more scalable, self-serve direction before the final workspace model took shape.

The final direction replaced a separate creation sequence with a configurable report workspace. Populated field cards made the reference organization, comparison market, payers, service lines, codes, taxonomies, and filters visible beside the resulting table.

Users could adjust the inputs while preserving the full-width report as the primary reading mode. This connected report creation, interpretation, and iteration without asking analysts to rebuild their context.

I partnered with product manager Anmol and CEO Dilpreet, who served as CPO, to shape the product direction. Early research and sales exploration included enterprise seller Glenn, helping us connect reimbursement-analysis needs with the questions buyers asked during evaluation.

After the initial product took shape, Customer Success helped collect feedback and bring recurring questions back into the design process. The work moved through repeated cycles of product decisions, customer evidence, and sales learning rather than ending at a single launch.

Research planning centered on the information leaders found useful, how they shared reimbursement analysis, what frustrated them about existing reports, and which decisions the comparison needed to support.

The emerging requirement was not simply a prettier spreadsheet. Users needed to understand the cohort, filters, weighting, and calculation behind every percentage.

Customer Success and marketing explored ways to turn the analysis into shareable exports and presentation-ready insights for users and prospects. The most developed concept translated rate comparisons into an executive summary, service-line opportunities, payer-specific actions, a prioritization matrix, financial scenarios, and a negotiation roadmap.

This was a marketing and report-format exploration, not an implemented product export. The organization, opportunity values, and recommendations in the example are illustrative.

For Becker’s, I worked with the sales team on personalized CMA PDFs that representatives could put directly into prospects’ hands. The reports turned an abstract data product into a tangible view of a provider’s reimbursement position and generated interest at the event.

CMA later contributed to the sales motion behind Trek’s first six-figure enterprise deal. That outcome reflected work across product, leadership, sales, Customer Success, and marketing; CMA gave those teams a concrete way to demonstrate the value of Trek’s data in a buyer’s own market.