AUTODESKa case study
Apollo · Enterprise CPQ & ERP · via Applicantz

Autodesk

Modernize the backbone where sales, pricing, and fulfillment finally had to agree with each other.

Autodesk had outgrown its ERP — aging, heavily customized, a brake on digitization. Apollo was the ground-up replacement, and I owned the experience layer end to end for its Configure-Price-Quote and quote-to-order flows: both the customer-facing path and the dense internal platform behind it.

CPQ — quotes (recreation, sample data)
AUTODESKCPQ🔍 Search quotes, accounts…CH
QuotesAccountsOffersPricingReporting
Quotes
248 open · 12 awaiting your approval
≡ Filter+ New quote
QUOTEACCOUNTOFFERINGVALUESTATUSUPDATED
Q-48213Meridian ArchitectsAEC Collection · 25 seats$62,400In reviewJul 12
Q-48198Volk ManufacturingFlex tokens · 5,000$18,750DraftJul 12
Q-48042Cascade Civil GroupAutoCAD · 40 seats$114,200ApprovedJul 11
Q-47991Nordic Structures ABFusion · 15 seats$27,000Export holdJul 10
Q-47960Beacon Design StudioAEC Collection · 8 seats$19,840ApprovedJul 09
UX Designer IVUser flows & wireframesPrototypingDesign-system contributionCross-team facilitationAutodesk · via Applicantz
01The context

Every company outgrows the system it was built on.

Autodesk had reached that point with its ERP — the software that quietly runs how offers are composed, prices are set, and a quote becomes an order. Aging, heavily customized, and a brake on the company’s push toward digitization. The answer was a ground-up replacement program: Apollo.

Yesterday

Decades of accumulated logic, baked so deep nobody could fully see it.

Tomorrow

A modern, attribute-based platform built to flex and scale.

Modernize without simply reprinting the old complexity in a new coat of paint.
02The mandate

One owner for two experiences.

A quoting-and-fulfillment system has two sides that have to reconcile, and I picked them both up mid-handoff from an outside vendor. Part of the early job was archaeology — surfacing inherited assumptions baked so deep nobody could fully see them, before building on top of them.

Customer-facing

Wants to be simple, guided, forgiving — a path a customer follows without a manual open in the other window.

Internal platform

Unavoidably dense — where export controls, pricing authority, and contract structure actually get enforced.

!Why it mattered

This is where the money moves.

A confusing pricing control or an ambiguous quote-to-order handoff isn’t a cosmetic problem — it’s a revenue and compliance issue, feeding pricing, revenue recognition, and export compliance downstream. An over-simplified screen isn’t kindness — in this system, it’s risk.

03The goal

CPQ a real person could actually move through.

Configure, Price, Quote — and quote-to-order — that a salesperson or ops user could complete without a manual in the other window, while respecting the deep business rules an enterprise system can’t wish away.

Pricing authority

Who can set and change what, and where authority lives.

Availability

Controls on what can be offered, to whom, where.

Export control

Permissions and capabilities that keep the company compliant.

User roles

Who can do what as a deal moves toward a contract.

SFDC boundary

A clean handoff to Salesforce and the systems around it.

04Strategy before pixels

I made myself the connective tissue.

I set up and facilitated the design cadences and became the central point of contact across every group. Unglamorous — and exactly what large programs live or die on.

The failure mode isn’t bad design. It’s five groups quietly designing five different products.
05Who it was for

One system, many user types.

The requirements spoke in the voice of very different users — each holding one slice of the deal. “One product, not two” meant one coherent experience across all of them.

Order Capture

Users & admins who build, price, and place the quote.

Client Services

Support reps who help the customer after the sale.

Management Reporting

Finance analysts who need the numbers to hold together.

Export Control Admin

Can revoke entitlements to keep the company compliant.

End-User Admin

Manages their own team's access, products, and credits.

Channel & Agent Partners

Transact on the customer's behalf, at Autodesk pricing.

finalize quote — where the guardrails show (recreation)
AUTODESKCPQQ-48213 · Meridian ArchitectsCH
Quote Q-48213In review
LINE ITEMQTYLISTNET
AEC Collection · 3-yr25$54,350$48,750
Premium support25$9,250$9,250
Multi-year discount−$5,600
Total contract value$52,400
CHECKS
Pricing authority · within limit
Export control · cleared
Approval · 1 of 2 reviewers
SFDC HANDOFF
↻ Linked to Opportunity #OP-9921
Submit for approvalUpdate quote
THE SPINEQuote to order, end to end

Expose the dense machinery — on purpose.

I designed and contributed across the whole journey — eight flows that had to read as one continuous path from landing to order:

CPQ landing
start
Account & contact match
who
Add & configure offer
what
Composition & pricing
how much
Availability
controls
Finalize & update
the shown screen
Search & reporting
find
Quote-to-order
handoff

On the finalize screen the guardrails are visible by design — pricing authority within limit, export control cleared, two-reviewer approval, and the linked Salesforce opportunity — because in this system, hiding them is the risk.

THE HEARTAdd & configure offer

Compose the offer — with the price in view the whole time.

The core of CPQ: build an offer from attribute-based parts — products, services, programs, discounts — while a live summary keeps the number honest. Multi-year discount and Premium uplift apply automatically per the pricing rules, so a rep never has to leave to do the math.

add & configure offer — the heart of CPQ (recreation)
AUTODESKCPQQ-48213 · Meridian ArchitectsCH
✓ Account◉ Configure offerPricingFinalize
CATALOG
Products
Services
Programs
Discounts
AEC Collection
AutoCAD
Revit · Fusion
AEC Collection
Architecture, Engineering & Construction · single-user subscription
Term
3 years
Seats
25
Support level
Premium
Billing
Annual
Start date
Aug 1, 2021
ⓘ Multi-year discount and Premium uplift applied automatically per pricing rules.
OFFER SUMMARY
AEC Collection × 25$48,750
Premium support$9,250
Multi-year discount−$5,600
Net (3-yr)$52,400
Annual$17,467
Add to quote
Save & continue later
eStore checkout — the customer pole (recreation)
AUTODESK🔒 Secure checkout
Billing address
All fields required unless noted.
First name
Maxim
Last name
Kalinochkin
Address
Keizersgracht 123
City
Amsterdam
Postal code
1015 CJ
Country
Netherlands
VAT No. (optional)
NL
Payment
Accepted cards: Visa, Mastercard, Amex
Card number
•••• •••• •••• 4242VISA
Expiration
08 / 26
Security code
•••
ORDER SUMMARY
AEC Collection25 seats · 3-year · Premium
Subtotal$52,400.00
VAT (21%)$11,004.00
Total$63,404.00
Place order
THE OTHER POLEeStore checkout

Where a quote becomes an order — simple, guided, forgiving.

The same deal the internal CPQ was enforcing, shown to the customer as one clean transaction: billing, VAT, payment, and a running order summary. The dense machinery stays on the internal side; the customer sees a path they can finish without a manual open in the other window.

04The business model was moving

From seats you renew to tokens you spend.

Apollo had to enable Flex — a consumption model where customers buy credits and draw them down as they use products. That changes what a quote even is, and the flows had to say so.

Buy credits

Tokens purchased up front — with future start dates — instead of a fixed seat count.

Draw them down

Access tied to a live balance — it stops at zero, resumes on purchase, with no renewal.

See what’s left

Admins track credits purchased, used, and expiring — and plan the next buy.

Design impact

Quoting & access had to express consumption, not just a seat count.

WHERE FINANCE LIVEDFlex reporting

Consumption as a single source of truth.

Flex turned quoting into an ongoing balance, so reporting had to make consumption legible: tokens purchased, used, and expired, plus deferred revenue and retention — the numbers finance needs to hold together as a quote stops being a one-time seat count.

flex reporting — where finance lived (recreation, sample data)
AUTODESKCPQFY22 · Flex programCH
QuotesAccountsOffersPricingReporting
Flex consumption
Sample data · updated daily
Last 12 months ▾
TOKENS PURCHASED
2.4M
TOKENS USED
1.8M
EXPIRED UNUSED
180K
FLEX RETENTION
86%
Tokens purchased vs. used
Purchased Used
Deferred revenue
Recognized$14.2M
Deferred$6.7M
Unused liability$1.1M
Forecast (next Q)$7.9M
07Method

Make the invisible logic visible.

The through-line across every artifact: take business rules baked so deep nobody could see them, and make them reviewable. Reusable components contributed back — not one-offs — so the next designer inherits the pattern, kept consistent with Autodesk’s brand and built to outlast the engagement.

User flows

To make the invisible business rules visible and reviewable.

Wireframes

To pressure-test the sequence of decisions a user actually faces.

Prototypes

To show — not just assert — how the end-to-end experience should feel.

Design system

Reusable components contributed back, so the next designer inherits the pattern.

The tension that made it real

Which complexity to hide, and which to make the user look at.

Simple & guided

Let the system make the decision. Keep the path forgiving. Hide the machinery.

Dense & deliberate

Force a conscious choice. Expose the control. Because getting it wrong moves money.

Facilitating alignment was facilitating this trade-off — over and over, until it held together as one product instead of two.

Where it landed & what it taught me
8+
end-to-end flows
·
2
audiences reconciled
·
1
design system, grown
·
6 mo
the engagement

The highest-leverage skill was alignment, not the artifact.

Being the deliberate center of communication prevented more rework than any single screen I drew. Respect the inheritance before adding to it; and remember that ERP UX is deciding which complexity to hide and which to make the user look at on purpose.

The screens shown are clean recreations for portfolio use with sample data; program metrics (adoption, cycle-time, error-rate) aren’t quoted here.