Back to workbench
Architecture Note7 min read
Building an Enterprise Finance UI Like a Real Product
Dense UI is not automatically bad. Finance tools need speed, filters, drilldowns, saved views, exports, and auditability.
Enterprise finance software has a different definition of good UX. The best interface is often dense, predictable, auditable, and fast for someone who uses it every day.
What I was trying to do
I was trying to make Intacct feel like a serious finance workspace instead of a decorative dashboard.
What I learned
- Dense UI is not automatically bad when users need comparison, repetition, and speed.
- Finance tools need filters, saved views, exports, audit logs, and drilldowns more than marketing-style polish.
- Role-based workspaces make the product feel smaller for each user without reducing platform scope.
- Tables become product surfaces, not just data displays.
Technical notes
- AP, AR, GL, Cash, Reporting, Admin, Notifications, and Audit should share table and filter primitives.
- Saved views need durable metadata, not local-only UI state.
- Exports should be permissioned and audited.
- Drilldowns should preserve context so users can return to filtered lists without losing state.
Open questions
- How much configurability should be available before it overwhelms the UI?
- What is the right line between module-specific behavior and shared table infrastructure?
- How should audit log visibility vary by role?
Next steps
- Keep moving hardcoded UI data into service-layer calls.
- Standardize saved view metadata.
- Add module-specific empty, loading, and error states.
- Tie exports and drilldowns into audit logs.
Tags
- Intacct
- Enterprise UX
- Finance
- RBAC