Case study — CHOOZ · iOS App Design
Chooz
Sociocratic governance, translated into a mobile interface — so every voice shapes the decision
02 — The problem and research
The problem we set out to solve was not technical — it was structural. Group chats have the tools. They lack the framework. When a group of people needs to reach a decision, WhatsApp becomes a cacophony: dominant voices crowd out quieter ones, emoji-counting substitutes for structured input, and the process defaults to whoever shouts loudest or gives up last. This is not a feature gap. It is an absence of governance.
Research methodology — mixed methods, two rounds
What the research actually found
The critical pivot — from tool to framework
Our initial proposals were WhatsApp-native: a polling add-on, a keyboard extension, a chatbot. The second semester forced a harder question: were we solving the right problem? A polling tool addresses symptoms. The root problem is the absence of a structured governance model for peer groups. This drove the pivot to sociocracy — and to a standalone app that treats decision-making as a discipline, not a feature.
03 — Translating sociocracy into UI
Sociocracy — developed by Gerard Endenburg in the 1950s — is a decision-making system built on consent rather than majority rule, circular structure rather than hierarchy, and continuous feedback rather than finite votes. Translating it into a mobile interface required first understanding what it demands of users: not speed, but structured participation; not agreement, but the absence of reasoned objection. Every screen in Chooz maps to a stage in the sociocratic process.
The six-stage consensus process — click to explore
The five design pillars
The "reserve opinion" — the most consequential UX decision in the app
Standard polling apps offer Agree / Disagree. Chooz adds a third option: "I'm not sure about this." This is not an abstention — it is a structurally significant input. The user who selects it is required to write a justification. That justification is visible to the group and triggers another round of discussion. This single interaction is a direct translation of sociocratic theory: unresolved reservation is not ignored, it becomes the next agenda item. No comparable app implements this mechanism.
04 — Live prototypes — click to interact
The Figma prototypes below are live and interactive. Each flow demonstrates a specific sociocratic value embedded in the app's interaction design. Click through the screens — these are not mockups, they are the designed user experience. The full flow covers the complete journey from group creation to consensus.
Full prototype flow — complete user journey
Principle flows — each pillar demonstrated
05 — Design decisions and vote mechanic
The three-state voting system is the core innovation in Chooz. Agree and Disagree are familiar. The third option — "I'm not sure about this" — is structurally different from both. It requires a justification and returns to the group as an open thread. Try it below to experience the interaction as a participant would.
Visual design system
06 — What I learned
Chooz was academically rigorous and practically ambitious. The lessons are not primarily about UX patterns — they are about what happens when you try to encode social theory into product logic, and what breaks when you discover that real groups do not behave like theoretical models predict.
The problem you start with is rarely the problem you end with
We began designing a WhatsApp add-on and ended designing a governance system. The pivot was painful but necessary. Research that only confirms your initial hypothesis is not research — it is validation theater. The willingness to abandon a semester of work when the evidence demands it is the most important design skill of all.
Translating theory into UI requires understanding what the theory actually asks of people
Sociocracy does not ask people to agree — it asks them to remove their objections. That is a fundamentally different demand. Every screen in Chooz had to be designed for this: the reserve option, the justification requirement, the discussion threads, the consensus check. Getting the theory wrong would have produced a polling app with good branding.
The most important feature is the one that feels most like a limitation
The reserve option with mandatory justification will frustrate users who want a quick poll. That frustration is the product working correctly. Chooz is not designed for speed — it is designed for equity. The friction of the reserve mechanism is the mechanism. Removing it to improve conversion would destroy the thing that makes the app coherent.
Information architecture is the difference between a feature and a philosophy
The "Tree" metaphor — decisions with nested questions, branches of ideas, and a root consensus — is not decorative. It encodes the sociocratic circle structure into the app's information model. Without that underlying architecture, the voting feature is just a poll. With it, Chooz becomes a system for thinking together.
Academic rigor produces better product thinking
The 106-page thesis behind Chooz was not separate from the design — it was the design process made visible. Literature review, methodology, interview analysis, theoretical framework, implementation consideration: each chapter was a design decision documented before the screens were drawn. This is how products should be built — from understanding, not from assumption.
Chooz in the context of the portfolio
HP Smart Digitization
Innovation & Discovery
Cobria
Enterprise Authority
Vienna Airport T2
Physical Systems Anchor
CHOOZ
Logic & Social Systems
Capabilities demonstrated