Question 1
New Email Header
Problem statement
Emails to sellers don't consistently display both the Candex ID and client logos.
When the Candex ID is included, the client's branding disappears.
Business impact
Sellers may not recognize the client quickly.
If Candex ID is not included, finance teams who get forwarded invoices might lack the authentication code, delaying payments.
Inconsistent branding reduces professionalism.
Requirements
- Always display client logo (regardless of Candex ID).
- Support different logo formats (long-horizontal, tall-vertical).
- Authentication code must be visible and scannable.
- Keep email header clean, responsive, and easy to scan.
- Optimize for the right information hierarchy.
- Scalable to all clients without manual adjustment.
- Accessible (font sizes, contrast, alt text).
- Optimize for sceen real estate to efficiently use the space.
Information hierarchy
Why this order?
Quick visual anchor — users know who the email is from before reading text. Also important when finance teams get forwarded emails — they recognize the sender brand instantly.
These are the primary contextual anchors for the transaction (e.g., Ship To, PO #). Recipients often scan for "which order is this?" and "does it relate to me/my team?"
While less universally recognizable than a PO number, the Candex ID doubles as an authentication code, which is critical for workflows like invoice resubmission. High functional importance, but only relevant in certain cases — hence placed below PO/order context but above sender details.
Provides textual confirmation of the logo. Helpful if the logo doesn't render (email client blocking images) or when multiple brands exist under a parent company.
Essential for completing tasks, but it becomes relevant once the user is sure they're looking at the right order/client. Prioritizing context first prevents misclicks or mistrust.
Adds completeness for finance/ops teams (e.g., location, reference codes), but these are not usually the first scan targets.
Design proposals
Upload a different logo per proposal to see how each layout adapts.
Proposal E — Two‑column, logo under From
Matches the provided screenshot and guarantees logo visibility.
Proposal A — Closest match to desired information hierarchy
Matches the desired IA: logo first, large title, stacked ID label, and action at bottom-right.
Proposal B — Logo top‑right above button
Highlights logo in the header's action area.
Proposal C — Three‑column with centered logo
Balances brand with Candex ID; works for tall logos.
use as authentication code
Proposal D — Logo first, left‑aligned
Logo is the first element in the reading order.
Recommendation
Proposal A is the recommended solution.
| Criteria | A | B | C | D | E |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Respects Information Hierarchy (Logo → Order Info → Candex ID → CTA) | 5 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| Logo Visibility & Adaptability (wide & tall logos) | 4 | 3 | 3 | 5 | 4 |
| Readability / Scan Order (natural LTR reading flow) | 5 | 2 | 5 | 3 | 4 |
| Clarity of Action (CTA placement & emphasis) | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Consistency & Scalability across clients | 5 | 3 | 4 | 4 | 4 |
| Overall User Trust & Brand Recognition | 5 | 2 | 4 | 3 | 4 |
| Total Score | 28 | 16 | 24 | 22 | 24 |